Corona City Council
February 5, 2025

B. If Native American human remains and/or grave goods discovered or recognized on the project site, then all construction activities shall immediately cease. Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 dictates that any discoveries of human skeletal material shall be immediately reported to the County Coroner and all ground-disturbing activities shall immediately halt and shall remain halted until the coroner has determined the nature of the remains. If the coroner recognizes the human remains to be those of a Native American or has reason to believe they are Native American, he or she shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission, and Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 shall be followed.

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES

ENPLANNERS

4.18-18
C. Human remains and grave/burial goods shall be treated alike per California Public Resources Code section 5097.98(d)(1) and (2).

D. Construction activities may resume in other parts of the project site at a minimum of 200 feet away from discovered human remains and/or burial goods, if the Kizh determines in its sole discretion that resuming construction activities at that distance is acceptable and provides the project manager express consent of that determination (along with any other mitigation measures the Kizh monitor and/or archaeologist deems necessary). (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(f).)
E. Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner of treatment for discovered human remains and/or burial goods. Any historic archaeological material that is not Native American in origin (non-TCR) shall be curated at a public, non-profit institution with a research interest in the materials, such as the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County or the Fowler Museum, if such an institution agrees to accept the material. If no institution accepts the archaeological material, it shall be offered to a local school or historical society in the area for educational purposes.

F. Any discovery of human remains/burial goods shall be kept confidential to prevent further disturbance.

MM TCR-3: Procedures for Burials and Funerary Remains:

A. As the Most Likely Descendant (“MLD”), the Koo-nas-gna Burial Policy shall be implemented. To the Tribe, the term “human remains” encompasses more than human bones. In ancient as well as historic times, Tribal Traditions included, but were not limited to, the preparation of the soil for burial, the burial of funerary objects with the deceased, and the ceremonial burning of human remains.

B. If the discovery of human remains includes four or more burials, the discovery location shall be treated as a cemetery and a separate treatment plan shall be created.

C. The prepared soil and cremation soils are to be treated in the same manner as bone fragments that remain intact. Associated funerary objects are objects that, as part of the death rite or ceremony of a culture, are reasonably believed to have been placed with individual human remains either at the time of death or later; other items made exclusively for burial purposes or to contain human remains can also be considered as associated funerary objects. Cremations will either be removed in bulk or by means as necessary to ensure complete recovery of all sacred materials.

D. In the case where discovered human remains cannot be fully documented and recovered on the same day, the remains will be covered with muslin cloth and a steel plate that can be moved by heavy equipment placed over the excavation opening to protect the remains.

If this type of steel plate is not available, a 24-hour guard should be posted outside of working hours. The Tribe will make every effort to recommend diverting the project and

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES

ENPLANNERS

4.18-19
keeping the remains in situ and protected. If the project cannot be diverted, it may be determined that burials will be removed.

E. In the event preservation in place is not possible despite good faith efforts by the project applicant/developer and/or landowner, before ground-disturbing activities may resume on the project site, the landowner shall arrange a designated site location within the footprint of the project for the respectful reburial of the human remains and/or ceremonial objects.

F. Each occurrence of human remains and associated funerary objects will be stored using opaque cloth bags. All human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects and objects of cultural patrimony will be removed to a secure container on site if possible. These items should be retained and reburied within six months of recovery. The site of reburial/repatriation shall be on the project site but at a location agreed upon between the Tribe and the landowner at a site to be protected in perpetuity. There shall be no publicity regarding any cultural materials recovered.

G. The Tribe will work closely with the project’s qualified archaeologist to ensure that the excavation is treated carefully, ethically and respectfully. If data recovery is approved by the Tribe, documentation shall be prepared and shall include (at a minimum) detailed descriptive notes and sketches. All data recovery data recovery-related forms of documentation shall be approved in advance by the Tribe. If any data recovery is performed, once complete, a final report shall be submitted to the Tribe and the NAHC.

The Tribe does NOT authorize any scientific study or the utilization of any invasive and/or destructive diagnostics on human remains.

MM CUL-1: as previously defined in Section 4.5.10.

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES

ENPLANNERS

4.18-20
This Page Intentionally Left Blank

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 2024

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

ENPLANNERS

4.19-1

4.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

4.19.1 INTRODUCTION
This section provides a summary of applicable impacts and mitigation measures from the 2001 EIR, an overview of existing utility and service systems within the GRRSP Planning Area and surrounding region, a summary of applicable regulations, and analyses of potential changes in impacts utility and service systems from implementation of the Modified Project in comparison to the Approved Project. Utilities and services systems include water supply and distribution systems; wastewater (sewage) conveyance and treatment; storm drainage systems; solid waste collection and disposal services; and other public utilities.

Mitigation measures are recommended as necessary to reduce significant air quality impacts.

No NOP comment letters were received pertaining to this topic. A Public Scoping Meeting comment was received from Francesca Da Sacco pertaining to this topic.

This section of the Draft SEIR is based on the Preliminary Wastewater Report Green River Rach Business Park, prepared by KWC Engineers, dated April 2022 (Appendix O-1), the Preliminary Water Report Green River Rach Business Park, prepared by KWC Engineers, dated November 2021(Appendix O-2), and the Water Supply Assessment for the Green River Ranch Business Park, prepared by Michael Baker International, dated June 2024 (Appendix O-3).

4.19.2 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES FROM THE 2001 EIR
The Approved Project impact analysis related to utilities and service systems as presented in the 2001 EIR as well as any mitigation measures identified to reduce significant impacts are summarized as follows:
a) Power or natural gas?
As determined in the 2001 EIR, impacts to power services provided by Southern California Edison (SCE), and natural gas services provided by the Southern California Gas Company (SGC) would be less than significant as the Approved Project would produce a small percentage of the electricity/natural gas utilized by consumers or provided by these utilities on a daily basis. The 2001 EIR stated prior to the issuance of building permits, the developer shall submit plans showing the incorporation of energy conservation measures into the project in accordance with Title 24 of the California Administrative Code, and prior to the issuance of certificates of occupancy, the developer shall extend existing power and gas lines into the site in coordination with SCE and the Gas Company, and in accordance with Public Utilities Commission (PUC) regulations. The 2001 determined upon compliance with these

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

ENPLANNERS

4.19-2
requirements, with implementation of the Approved Project no significant impacts would occur.
b) Communications systems?
As determined in the 2001 EIR, telephone service to the Approved Project area is provided by Pacific Bell and provides service on demand. As concluded in the 2001 EIR, coordination with Pacific Bell will ensure timely service, and with implementation of the Approved Project, no significant impact would occur.
c) Water treatment/distribution/supply?
As determined in the 2001 EIR, implementation of the Approved Project’s Conceptual Water Plan as prescribed in the Approved GRRSP will reduce impacts related to provision of water delivery infrastructure to less than significant. As stated in the 2001 EIR, although the existing water delivery infrastructure system will need to be expanded, the Conceptual Water Plan contained in the Approved GRRSP provides the necessary infrastructure to accommodate development in the Approved GRRSP Planning Area within the City’s water service zones 1 and 2. In addition, the Approved Project although will likely increase demand for water, the 2001 EIR conlcuded the City of Corona Water Utilities Department indicated that there are sufficient water supplies to serve the water demand for the Approved GRRSP Planning Area.

Consequently, the 2001 EIR determined the increase in water demand resulting from development of the Approved Project is considered to be less than significant. d) Sewer or septic tanks?
The 2001 EIR determined, although the Approved Project will likely increase wastewater effluent flows to the City’s wastewater treatment system, the City of Corona Water Utilities Department indicates that there is sufficient wastewater capacity to serve the wastewater generation estimated for the Specific Plan area. As such, the 2001 EIR determined the increase in wastewater resulting from development of the Specific Plan is considered to be less than significant.
e) Storm water drainage?
The 2001 EIR determined, the Approved Projectsite is not within any identified 100-year flood zone or dam inundation area, and modification of existing topography would change the rate, flow, and direction of stormwater and may produce localized flooding. Although storm flows resulting from implementation of the Approved Project will exceed the capacity of the existing culverts, as included in mitigation measures MM 4.11.2A and 4.11.2B the construction of three on-site detention basins will reduce the volume of storm flows to a level that the existing culverts can sufficiently accommodate. As determined in the 2001 EIR, adherence to the above stated mitigation measures would reduce potential impacts associated with any increase in the amount of surface runoff to less significant levels.

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 2024

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

ENPLANNERS

4.19-3
f) Solid waste?
As determined in the 2001 EIR, development of the Approved Project would generate solid waste from use and occupancy of the on-site commercial, industrial and residential uses. As stated in the 2001 EIR, the amount of solid waste estimated to be generated by the Approved Project amounts to significantly less than 1 percent of this average daily volume. Based on this information, the 2001 EIR determined no significant impact related to solid waste issues is anticipated.

Cumulative Impacts?
As stated in the 2001 EIR, the Approved Project’s development associated with the GRRSP would increase water service demand to the City of Corona by approximately 236-acre feet per year (211,213gpd). However, the 2001 EIR determined the City of Corona Water Utilities department has stated existing water sources can accommodate the projected level of population and employment growth created by the Approved Project. In addition, the 2001 EIR stated this increase in demand of 236-acre feet associated with the Approved Project is an increase of less than 1 percent of current water sales (0.85 percent) and both imported surface water and local groundwater supplies are expected to be available to meet service area water demand in the future. In addition, the 2001 EIR determined the Water Utilities Department has anticipated increases in water demand and the associated infrastructure in its water facilities and supply planning efforts. Therefore, as determined in the 2001 EIR, the Approved Project’s contributions to potential cumulative water service impacts (an increase of 0.85 percent of the current total water demand) are considered to be less than significant.

In addition, the 2001 EIR determined new development associated with the Approved Project would increase wastewater generation, however existing wastewater treatment facilities can accommodate the projected level of population and employment growth created by the Approved Project. Furthermore, the 2001 concluded that existing and planned wastewater facilities are expected to be available to meet citywide wastewater generation in the future.

Therefore, the 2001 EIR determined contributions to potential cumulative wastewater service impacts are considered to be less than significant.

4.19.3 ENIVRIONMENTAL SETTING
Water Service
Water service to the GRRSP Planning Area will be provided by the City of Corona’s Utilities Department (CUP). The City’s domestic potable water supply is derived from the following sources: local wells, Colorado River, and State Water Project water from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD). The local wells are located in the Temescal, Bedford, and Coldwater Basins. Water deliveries supplied from the State Water Project are conveyed directly to the City’s existing water filtration plant.

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

ENPLANNERS

4.19-4
Under existing conditions, An existing 10” waterline extends along Dominguez Ranch Road from the adjacent Sierra Del Oro community. The existing 16” water transmission line along Green River Road, which currently terminates at near the eastern edge of the project, will be extended to service the Specific Plan area to Fresno Road, and then extend south to the limits of Fresno Road. 12” lines will be extended onsite to service all of the nonresidential areas. 12” lines will be constructed to service the residential areas.

Storm Water Drainage
Within the Modified Project area, there are four major flowlines convey towards Green River Road. Two of the four major flowlines converge into single stream towards a headwall inlet structure then convey across Green River Road to the north. This runoff combines with the offsite drainage area from Green River Road, the runoff ultimately convey towards BNSF railroad and to an existing 72-inch CMP underneath 91 Freeway. South of Green River Roar, the additional two drainage areas flow northerly towards Green River Road and then convey across the street via existing storm drain facilities. Along with small offsite area, these runoff will continue flow via natural streambed towards BNSF railroad and eventually discharge under existing 54-inch CMP underneath 91 Freeway.

Sewer System
The City of Corona CUD is the primary provider of sewer and sanitation services to Corona.

The CUD, Wastewater Division services a population of approximately 168,000 people over

38.5 square miles. The City sewer system is comprised of 13 sewer lift stations and associated force mains, three water reclamation facilities, and a network of gravity sewer pipes of approximately 368 miles with sizes ranging from 6 inches to 42 inches in diameter.

Approximately 83 percent of City pipes are 8 inches in diameter. The El Cerrito area is currently on septic systems. The City also has capacity in the (Western Riverside County Wastewater Authority) WRCRWA Plant; the City has a capacity of 2.62 million gallons per day (WRCRWA 2019b).

The site is in Sewershed 10 and drains north towards Green River Road. Nearby developments utilize the Sierra Del Oro Lift Station (SDO LS) to convey wastewater easterly through a 12- inch sewer force main in Palisades Drive. Sewage then flows by gravity through the 21-inch Railroad Trunk Sewer to WRF No. 1. The current treatment capacity of WRF No. 1 is 11.5 MGD with an expected future reliable treatment capacity of 14.5 MGD with improvements. It is our understanding that the WRF No. 1 has available treatment capacity to serve the Project.

There is an existing 10-inch gravity sewer line in Green River Road that collects flows from Kraft Ranch and surrounding developments and conveys them easterly to the Sierra Del Oro Lift Station. The Green River Lift Station is located northwest of the Project and conveys flows in an 8-inch force main that runs along the north side of the project and discharges to the existing 10-inch gravity sewer line in Green River Road. The Prado Lift Station is located

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 2024

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

ENPLANNERS

4.19-5
northeast of the Project and conveys flow through a 4-inch force main to the existing 10-inch gravity sewer line in Green River Road. Per the City 2005 Sewer Master Plan modeling results, the existing 10-inch gravity sewer line in Green River Road is flowing over full pipe capacity and needs to be replaced with a larger line.

The SDO LS was constructed in 1987 and is approaching the end of its useful life. The lift station has a total pumping capacity of 1,460 gallons per minute (gpm). The 2005 Sewer Master Plan estimates that the ultimate peak wet weather flow to the lift station will be 1950 gpm.

From Table 2-4, this study shows a PWWF of 0.255 cfs which equates to 114 gpm from the proposed BPI development and future commercial and estate residential development. The Modified Project will be required to participate in the relocation and upgrade of the SDO LS and surrounding improvements.

Solid Waste Services
The Riverside County Department of Waste Resources (RCDWR) is responsible for the efficient and effective landfill disposal of non-hazardous waste within the County, and operates six active landfills in addition to holding a contract agreement to dispose of waste at the private El Sobrante Landfill (Riverside County, 2015). Solid waste generated in the Project area is disposed of at either the El Sobrante Landfill, Lamb Canyon Landfill, or Badlands Landfill.

The El Sobrante Landfill is currently permitted to receive 16,054 tons per day (tpd), while the average daily tonnage in June 2022 was 11,003 tpd. The Lamb Canyon Landfill is permitted to receive 5,000 tpd, while data from June 2022 shows that the Lamb Canyon Landfill received a daily average of approximately 2,095.7 tpd. The Badlands Landfill is permitted to receive 4,800 tpd, while in May 2022 the Badlands Landfill received an average of 2,479 tpd. (RCDWR, 2022).

Under existing conditions, the City of Corona contracts with Waste Management Inc. (WMI) for trash and recycling services. In 2018, 256,311 tons of solid waste and 152 tons of alternative daily from the City were landfilled (CalRecycle, 2019a). It is anticipated that some industrial users may contract with private waste disposal companies. It is also anticipated future development of the GRRSP Planning Area, individual tenants and residents of the Modified Project will participate in recycling programs as offered by the City and other private organizations.

Other Service
The GRRSP Planning Area also is located in the service territories of the Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas) (natural gas) and Southern California Edison (electricity).

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

ENPLANNERS

4.19-6

4.19.4 EXISTING REGULATIONS, PLANS, PROGRAMS, AND POLICIES

FEDERAL REGULATIONS
Clean Water Act and National Pollution Elimination Discharge System Wastewater treatment before effluent is discharged to Waters of the United States is required by the federal Clean Water Act, United States Code, Title 33, Sections 1251 et seq.

Requirements for waste discharges from publicly owned treatment works to navigable waters are addressed in National Pollution Elimination Discharge System (NPDES) regulations under the Clean Water Act. NPDES permits for such discharges in the Project region are issued by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Safe Water Drinking Act
The federal Safe Drinking Water Act regulates the nation’s drinking water and gives the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) the authority to set national drinking water standards and regulations. All public water systems that provide service to 25 or more individuals must meet these standards. Water purveyors must monitor for contaminants on fixed schedules and report to the EPA when a maximum contaminant level is exceeded. Contaminants include organic and inorganic chemicals, substances that are known to cause cancer, radionuclides, and microbial contaminants (e.g., coliform and E. coli). The California Department of Public Health is responsible for implementation of the Safe Drinking Water Act in California.

United States Department of Energy/Federal Energy Regulatory Commission The United States Department of Energy (DOE) is the federal agency responsible for establishing policies regarding energy conservation, domestic energy production and infrastructure. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) is an independent federal agency, officially organized as part of the DOE which is responsible for regulating interstate transmission of natural gas, oil and electricity, reliability of the electric grid and approving of construction of interstate natural gas pipelines and storage facilities. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 has also granted FERC with additional responsibilities of overseeing the reliability of the nation’s electricity transmission grid and supplementing state transmission siting efforts in national interest electric transmission corridors.

FERC has authority to oversee mandatory reliability standards governing the nation’s electricity grid. FERC has established rules on certification of an Electric Reliability Organization (ERO) which establishes, approves and enforces mandatory electricity reliability standards. The North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) has been certified as the nation’s ERO by FERC to enforce reliability standards in all interconnected jurisdictions in North America. Although FERC regulates the bulk energy transmission and reliability throughout the United States, the areas outside of FERC’s jurisdictional responsibility include

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 2024

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

ENPLANNERS

4.19-7
state level regulations and retail electricity and natural gas sales to consumers which falls under the jurisdiction of state regulatory agencies.

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) requires all new cellular tower construction to be approved by the state or local authority for the proposed site and comply with FCC rules involving environmental review. Additionally, the Telecommunications Act of 1996 requires construction of new cellular towers to comply with the local zoning authority. (FERC, n.d.)

STATE REGULATIONS
Water Conservation in Landscaping Act
The Water Conservation in Landscaping Act was established to ensure adequate water supplies are available for future uses. To promote the conservation and efficient use of water, the Act requires local agencies to adopt a water efficient landscape ordinance. When such an ordinance had not been adopted, a finding as to why (based on the climatic, geologic, or topographical conditions) such an ordinance is not necessary, must be adopted. In the absence of such an ordinance or findings, the policies and requirements contained in the “model” ordinance drafted by the State of California shall apply within the affected jurisdiction. (CA Legislative Info, n.d.)
Water Recycling in Landscaping Act
In 2000, SB 2095 (Water Recycling in Landscaping Act) was approved by Governor Davis requiring any local public or private entity that produces recycled water and determines that within 10 years it will provide recycled water within the boundaries of a local agency, to notify the local agency of that fact. In turn, local agencies are required to adopt and enforce within 180 days a specified recycled water ordinance, unless the local agency adopted a recycled water ordinance or other regulation requiring the use of recycled water in its jurisdiction prior to January 1, 2001. (CA Legislative Info, n.d.)
Urban Water Management Planning Act
The Urban Water Management Planning Act (UWMP Act) was proposed and adopted to ensure that water planning is conducted at the local level, as the State of California recognized that two water agencies in the same region could have very different impacts from a drought.

The UWMP Act requires water agencies to develop UWMPs over a 20-year planning horizon, and further required UWMPs to be updated every five years. UWMPs are exempt from compliance with CEQA. (DWR, 2016, p. 1-2)
The UWMPs provide a framework for long term water planning and inform the public of a supplier’s plans for long-term resource planning that ensures adequate water supplies for existing and future demands. This part of the California Water Code (CWC) requires urban water suppliers to report, describe, and evaluate:

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

ENPLANNERS

4.19-8
• Water deliveries and uses;
• Water supply sources;
• Efficient water uses;
• Demand management measures; and
• Water shortage contingency planning. (DWR, 2016, p. 1-3) The UWMP Act has been modified over the years in response to the State’s water shortages, droughts, and other factors. A significant amendment was made in 2009, after the drought of 2007-2009 and as a result of the governor’s call for a statewide 20 percent reduction in urban water use by the year 2020. This was the Water Conservation Act of 2009, also known as SB X7-7. This Act required agencies to establish water use targets for 2015 and 2020 that would result in statewide savings of 20 percent by 2020. Beginning in 2016, retail water suppliers are required to comply with the water conservation requirements in SB X7-7 in order to be eligible for State water grants or loans. Retail water agencies are required to set targets and track progress toward decreasing daily per capita urban water use in their service area, which will assist the State in meeting its 20 percent reduction goal by 2020. (DWR, 2016, p. 1-2) Government Code § 66473.7(b)(2) (Senate Bill 221)
Under Senate Bill (SB) 221, approval by a city or county of certain residential subdivisions requires an affirmative written verification of sufficient water supply. SB 221 is intended as a ‘fail safe’ mechanism to ensure that collaboration on finding the needed water supplies to serve a new large subdivision occurs before construction begins. SB 221 requires the legislative body of a city or county or the advisory agency, to the extent that it is authorized by local ordinance to approve, conditionally approve, or disapprove a tentative map, must include as a condition in any tentative map that includes a subdivision a requirement that a sufficient water supply shall be available. Proof of the availability of a sufficient water supply must be requested by the subdivision applicant or local agency, at the discretion of the local agency, and id based on written verification from the applicable public water system within 90 days of a request. SB 221 does not apply to any residential project proposed for a site that is within an urbanized area and has been previously developed for urban uses, or where the immediate contiguous properties surrounding the residential project site are, or previously have been, developed for urban uses, or housing projects that are exclusively for very low and low-income households. (DWR, 2003; CA Legislative Info, n.d.)
California SB 610
The CWC §§ 10910 through 10915 were amended by the enactment of SB 610 in 2002. SB 610 requires an assessment of whether available water supplies are sufficient to serve the demand generated by a proposed project, as well as the reasonably foreseeable cumulative demand in the region over the next 20 years under average normal year, single dry year, and

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 2024

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

ENPLANNERS

4.19-9
multiple dry year conditions. Under SB 610, water assessments must be furnished to local governments for inclusion in any environmental documentation for certain projects (as defined in CWC § 10912 [a]) subject to CEQA. (DWR, 2003; CA Legislative Info, n.d.) For the purposes of SB 610, “project” means any of the following:

1. (1) A proposed residential development of more than 500 dwelling units.

2. (2) A proposed shopping center or business establishment employing more than 1,000 persons or having more than 500,000 square feet of floor space.

3. (3) A proposed commercial office building employing more than 1,000 persons or having more than 250,000 square feet of floor space.

4. (4) A proposed hotel or motel, or both, having more than 500 rooms.

5. (5) A proposed industrial, manufacturing, or processing plant, or industrial park planned to house more than 1,000 persons, occupying more than 40 acres of land, or having more than 650,000 square feet of floor area.

6. (6) A mixed-use project that includes one or more of the projects specified in this subdivision.

7. (7) A project that would demand an amount of water equivalent to, or greater than, the amount of water required by a 500-dwelling unit project. (DWR, 2003; CA Legislative Info, n.d.)
California Water Code § 10610 et seq. (SB 901)
Signed into law on October 16, 1995, SB 901 required every urban water supplier to identify as part of its urban water management plan, the existing and planned sources of water available to the supplier over a prescribed 5-year period. The code requires the water service purveyor to assess the projected water demand associated with a proposed project under environmental review. Later provisions of SB 901 required compliance in the event that the proposed Project involved the adoption of a specific plan, amendment to, or revision of the land use element of a general plan or specific plan that would result in a net increase in the state population density.

Upon completion of the water assessment, cities and counties may agree or disagree with the conclusions of the water service purveyors, but cannot approve projects in the face of documented water shortfalls without first making certain findings. (CA Legislative Info, n.d.) Executive Order (EO) B-29-15 ordered the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) to impose restrictions to achieve a 25-percent reduction in potable urban water usage through February 28, 2016; directed the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) to lead a statewide initiative, in partnership with local agencies, to collectively replace 50 million square feet of lawns and ornamental turf with drought tolerant landscapes; and directed the California Energy Commission to implement a statewide appliance rebate program to provide monetary incentives for the replacement of inefficient household devices. (SWRCB, 2020)

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

ENPLANNERS

4.19-10
Executive Order B-37-16
Signed on May 9, 2016, EO B-37-16 established a new water use efficiency framework for California. The order bolstered the state’s drought resilience and preparedness by establishing longer-term water conservation measures that include permanent monthly water use reporting, new urban water use targets, reducing system leaks and eliminating clearly wasteful practices, strengthening urban drought contingency plans, and improving agricultural water management and drought plans. (SWRCB, 2020)
Executive Order B-40-17
Signed on April 7, 2017, EO B-40-17 ended the drought state of emergency in all California counties except Fresno, Kings, Tulare, and Tuolumne, where emergency drinking water projects will continue to help address diminished groundwater supplies. It maintains water reporting requirements and prohibitions on wasteful practices. The order was built on actions taken in Executive Order B-37-16, which remains in effect. In a related action, state agencies, including the DWR, released a plan to continue making water conservation a way of life. (SWRCB, 2020)
Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA)
The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) established a new structure for managing California’s groundwater resources at a local level by local agencies. SGMA required, by June 30, 2017, the formation of locally-controlled groundwater sustainability agencies (GSAs) in the State’s high- and medium- priority groundwater basins and subbasins (basins). A GSA is responsible for developing and implementing a groundwater sustainability plan (GSP) to meet the sustainability goal of the basin to ensure that it is operated within its sustainable yield, without causing undesirable results. The GSP Emergency Regulations for evaluating GSPs, the implementation of GSPs, and coordination agreements were adopted by DWR and approved by the California Water Commission on May 18, 2016. (DWR, n.d.) SB 610
SB 610, codified in CWC §§ 10910-10915, specifies the requirements for water supply assessments (WSAs) and their role in the CEQA process, and defines the role UWMPs play in the WSA process. SB 610 requires that, for projects subject to CEQA that meet specific size criteria, the water supplier prepare WSAs that determine whether the water supplier has sufficient water resources to serve the projected water demands associated with the projects.

SB 610 provides specific guidance regarding how future supplies are to be calculated in the WSAs where an applicable UWMP has been prepared. Specifically, a WSA must identify existing water supply entitlements, water rights, or water service contracts held by the public water system, and prior years’ actual water deliveries received by the public water system. In addition, the WSA must address water supplies over a 20-year period and consider normal,

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 2024

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

ENPLANNERS

4.19-11
single-dry, and multiple-dry year conditions. In accordance with SB 610, projects for which a WSA must be prepared are those subject to CEQA that meet any of the following criteria:
• Residential developments of more than 500 dwelling units; • Shopping centers or business establishments employing more than 1,000 persons or having more than 500,000 square feet of floor space;
• Commercial office buildings employing more than 1,000 persons or having more than 250,000 square feet of floor space;
• Hotels, motels, or both, having more than 500 rooms;
• Industrial, manufacturing, or processing plants, or industrial parks planned to house more than 1,000 persons, occupying more than 40 acres of land, or having more than 650,000 square feet of floor area
• Mixed-use projects that include one or more of the projects specified in this subdivision; or
• Projects that would demand an amount of water equivalent to or greater than the amount of water
required by a 500-dwelling-unit project. (CWC § 912, CEQA Guidelines § 15155(a).

The WSA must be approved by the public water supplier serving the project at a regular or special meeting and must be incorporated into the CEQA document. The lead agency must then make certain findings related to water supply based on the WSA.

In addition, under SB 610, a water supplier responsible for the preparation and periodic updating of an UWMP must describe the water supply projects and programs that may be undertaken to meet the total project water use of the service area. If groundwater is identified as a source of water available to the supplier, the following additional information must be included in the UWMP: (1) a groundwater management plan; (2) a description of the groundwater basin(s) to be used and the water use adjudication rights, if any; (3) a description and analysis of groundwater use in the past 5 years; and (4) a discussion of the sufficiency of the groundwater that is projected to be pumped by the supplier. (OPR, 2017c, p. 69 ) SB 606
SB 606 would require an urban retail water supplier to calculate an urban water use objective no later than November 1, 2023, and by November 1 every year thereafter, and its actual urban water use by those same dates. The bill would require an urban retail water supplier to submit a report to the department for these purposes by those dates. SB 606 would authorize the board to issue information orders, written notices, and conservation orders to an urban retail water supplier that does not meet its urban water use objective, as specified. The bill would authorize the board to waive these requirements for a period of up to 5 years, as specified. SB 606 would

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

ENPLANNERS

4.19-12
impose civil liability for a violation of an order or regulation issued pursuant to these provisions, as specified. The bill would also authorize the board to issue a regulation or informational order requiring a wholesale water supplier, urban retail water supplier, or distributor of a public water supply to provide a monthly report relating to water production, water use, or water conservation. (SWRCB, n.d.)
AB 1668
AB 1668 requires the SWRCB, in coordination with the Department of Water Resources, to adopt long-term standards for the efficient use of water, as provided, and performance measures for commercial, industrial, and institutional water use on or before June 30, 2022.

The bill, until January 1, 2025, establishes 55 gallons per capita daily as the standard for indoor residential water use. Beginning January 1, 2025, the bill establishes the greater of 52.5 gallons per capita daily or a standard recommended by the SWRCB and beginning January 1, 2030, the bill establishes the greater of 50 gallons per capita daily or a standard recommended by the SWRCB. AB 1668 imposes civil liability for a violation of an order or regulation issued pursuant to these provisions, as specified. (SWRCB, n.d.) California Plumbing Code
Title 24, Part 5 of the California Code of Regulations establishes the California Plumbing Code. The California Plumbing Code sets forth efficiency standards (i.e., maximum flow rates) for all new federally-regulated plumbing fittings and fixtures, including showerheads and lavatory faucets. The 2022 California Plumbing Code, which is based on the 2021 Uniform Plumbing Code, was published by the California Building Standards Commission on July 1, 2022 and will go into effect on January 1, 2023. (CBSC, 2022) California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 20 and 24
Title 20 includes state and federal minimum efficiency requirements for energy and water use in regulated appliances. These appliances include, but are not limited to, water heaters, furnaces, heat pumps, air conditioners, refrigerators, pumps, lamps and ballasts, computers, spray sprinkler bodies and showerheads. Manufacturers are responsible for certifying regulated appliances to the California Energy Commission’s Modernized Appliance Efficiency Database System. This serves as the manufacturer’s claim that it has met all applicable requirements, including testing, and marking products. (CCR, n.d.)
Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations is a broad set of requirements for energy conservation, green design, construction and maintenance, fire and life safety, and accessibility that apply to the structural, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems in a building. Title 24 was published by the California Building Standards Commission and applies to all buildings in California. Title 24 receives updates every three years with the latest revisions being in 2019.

Title 24 energy compliance requirements apply to new construction and any new installations

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 2024

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

ENPLANNERS

4.19-13
or retrofits in existing buildings. Older buildings do not have to upgrade their systems, but if they choose to renovate, their new systems must meet Title 24 standards. (CBCS, 2022) California Water Plan
The California Water Plan is the State's strategic plan for sustainably managing and developing water resources for current and future generations. Required by CWC § 10005(a), it presents the status and trends of California’s water-dependent natural resources; water supplies; and agricultural, urban, and environmental water demands for a range of plausible future scenarios.

The plan is updated every five years; provides a way for various groups to collaborate on findings and recommendations and make informed decisions regarding California’s water future; can't mandate actions or authorize spending for specific actions; doesn't make projector site-specific recommendations nor include environmental review or documentation as would be required by CEQA; and requires policy- and law-makers to take definitive steps to authorize the specific actions proposed in the plan and appropriate funding needed for their implementation.

California Water Plan Update 2018 (Update 2018) provides recommended actions, funding scenarios, and an investment strategy to bolster efforts by water and resource managers, planners, and decision-makers to overcome California’s most pressing water resource challenges. It reaffirms State government’s unique role and commitment to sustainable, equitable, long-term water resource management; it also introduces implementation tools to inform sound decision-making. The plan’s broad and diverse portfolio of recommended actions address California’s critical, systemic, and institutional challenges. (DWR, 2018) California Water Action Plan
The California Water Action Plan is a roadmap for the State’s journey towards sustainable water management. The first California Water Action Plan was released in January 2014 under Governor Brown’s administration and updated in 2016. The California Water Action Plan discusses the challenges to water in California: uncertain water supplies, water scarcity/drought, declining groundwater supplies, poor water quality, declining native fish species and loss of wildlife habitat, floods, supply disruptions, and population growth and climate change further increasing the severity of these risks. (CDFW, n.d.) California Solid Waste Integrated Waste Management Act (AB 939, 1989) The Integrated Waste Management Act (IWMA) established an integrated waste management hierarchy to guide the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) and local agencies in implementation, in order of priority: (1) source reduction, (2) recycling and composting, and (3) environmentally safe transformation and land disposal (it should be noted that the CIWMB no longer exists, and its duties have been assumed by CalRecycle. The CIWMB was given a purpose to mandate the reduction of disposed waste. The IWMA also required, among other items, each county to prepare, adopt, and submit to the Board an

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

ENPLANNERS

4.19-14
Integrated Waste Management Plan (IWMP) and each city or county plan to include an implementation schedule which shows diversion of 50 percent of all solid waste by January 1, 2000 through source reduction, recycling, and composting activities. (CalRecycle) Waste Reuse and Recycling Act (AB 1327)
The Waste Reuse and Recycling Act (WRRA) required the CIWMB to approve a model ordinance for adoption by any local government for the transfer, receipt, storage, and loading of recyclable materials in development projects by March 1, 1993. The WRRA also required local agencies to adopt a local ordinance by September 1, 1993 or allow the model ordinance to take effect. The WRRA requires all development projects that are commercial, industrial, institutional, or marina in nature and where solid waste is collected and loaded, to provide an adequate area for collecting and loading recyclable materials over the lifetime of the project.

The area is required to be provided before building permits are issued. (CalRecycle) Mandatory Commercial Recycling Program (Assembly Bill 341) Assembly Bill (AB) 341 (Chapter 476, Statutes of 2011 [Chesbro, AB 341]) directed CalRecycle to develop and adopt regulations for mandatory commercial recycling. CalRecycle initiated formal rulemaking with a 45-day comment period beginning Oct. 28, 2011. The final regulation was approved by the Office of Administrative Law on May 7, 2012. AB-341 was designed to help meet California’s recycling goal of 75% by the year 2020. AB 341 requires all commercial businesses and public entities that generate 4 cubic yards or more of waste per week to have a recycling program in place. In addition, multi-family apartments with five or more units are also required to form a recycling program. (CalRecycle, n.d.) California Green Building Standards Code (CAL Green; Part 11 of Title 24, California Code of Regulations)
The current edition of CALGreen became effective on January 1, 2023. CALGreen is applicable to the planning, design, operation, construction, use, and occupancy of every newly constructed building or structure throughout the State of California (including residential structures and elementary schools). The purpose of the CALGreen Code is to “improve public health, safety and general welfare by enhancing the design and construction of buildings through the use of building concepts having a positive environmental impact and encouraging sustainable construction practices in the following categories: (1) Planning and design; (2) Energy efficiency; (3) Water efficiency and conservation; (4) Material conservation and resource efficiency; and (5) Environmental air quality.” The CALGreen Code is not intended to substitute or be identified as meeting the certification requirements of any green building program that is not established and adopted by the California Building Standards Commission (CBSC). § 5.408.3 of the CALGreen Code requires that 100 percent of trees, stumps, rocks, and associated vegetation and soils resulting from land clearing shall be reused or recycled.

For a phased project, such material may be stockpiled on-site until the storage site is developed.

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 2024

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

ENPLANNERS

4.19-15
Unless otherwise noted in the regulation, all newly constructed buildings in California are subject of the requirements of the CALGreen Code (CBSC, 2022).

SB 1374
Signed in 2002, the Construction and Demolition Waste Materials Diversion Requirements (SB 1374) were codified in Public Resources Code Section 42919. SB 1374 requires that jurisdictions include in their annual AB 939 report a summary of the progress made in diverting construction and demolition waste. The legislation also required that CalRecycle adopt a model ordinance for diverting 50 to 75 percent of all construction and demolition waste from landfills.

The model ordinance was adopted by CalRecycle on March 16, 2004. (CA Legislative Info, n.d.)
AB 1826
AB 1826 requires jurisdictions to implement an organic waste recycling program for businesses, including outreach, education, and monitoring of affected businesses. Additionally, each jurisdiction is to identify a multitude of information, including barriers to siting organic waste recycling facilities, as well as closed or abandoned sites that might be available for new organic waste recycling facilities. AB 1826 defines “organic waste” as food waste, green waste, landscape and pruning waste, non-hazardous wood waste, and food-soiled paper waste that is mixed in with food waste. It also defines a “business” as a commercial or public entity, including, but not limited to, a firm, partnership, proprietorship, joint stock company, corporation, or association that is organized as a for-profit or nonprofit entity, or a multifamily residential dwelling consisting of five or more units. As of January 1, 2017, businesses that generate 4 cubic yards or more of organic waste per week are subject to this requirement.

Commencing January 1, 2019, businesses that generate 4 cubic yards or more of commercial solid waste per week also are required to arrange for organic waste recycling services.

CalRecycle may reduce this triggering threshold for organics recycling to 2 cubic yards or more of commercial solid waste per week as of January 1, 2020. (CA Legislative Info, n.d.) Zero Waste California
Zero Waste California is a state program launched by CalRecycle in 2002 to promote a new vision for the management of solid waste by maximizing existing recycling and reuse efforts, while ensuring that products are designed for the environment and have the potential to be repaired, reused, or recycled. The Zero Waste California program promotes the goals of market development, recycled product procurement, and research and development of new and sustainable technologies. (CalRecycle, n.d.)
California Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings (24 CA. Code Regs. 6)

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

ENPLANNERS

4.19-16
The Building Energy Efficiency Standards were first adopted in 1976 and have been updated periodically since then as directed by statute. In 1975 the Department of Housing and Community Development adopted rudimentary energy conservation standards under their State Housing Law authority that were a precursor to the first generation of the Standards.

However, the Warren-Alquist Act was passed one year earlier with explicit direction to the Energy Commission (formally titled the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission) to adopt and implement the Standards. The Energy Commission’s statute created separate authority and specific direction regarding what the Standards are to address, what criteria are to be met in developing the Standards, and what implementation tools, aids, and technical assistance are to be provided. (CBSC, 2022) The Standards contain energy and water efficiency requirements (and indoor air quality requirements) for newly constructed buildings, additions to existing buildings, and alterations to existing buildings. Public Resources Code (PRC) §§ 25402 subdivisions (a)-(b) and 25402.1 emphasize the importance of building design and construction flexibility by requiring the Energy Commission to establish performance standards, in the form of an “energy budget” in terms of the energy consumption per square foot of floor space. For this reason, the Standards include both a prescriptive option, allowing builders to comply by using methods known to be efficient, and a performance option, allowing builders complete freedom in their designs provided the building achieves the same overall efficiency as an equivalent building using the prescriptive option. Reference Appendices are adopted along with the Standards that contain data and other information that helps builders comply with the Standards. (CBSC, 2022) The 2022 update to the Building Energy Efficiency Standards focuses on several key areas to improve the energy efficiency of newly constructed buildings and additions and alterations to existing buildings. The most significant efficiency improvements to the residential Standards include the introduction of photovoltaic into the prescriptive package, improvements for attics, walls, water heating, and lighting. The most significant efficiency improvements to the nonresidential Standards include alignment with the ASHRAE 90.1 2017 national standards.

The 2022 Standards also include changes made throughout all of its sections to improve the clarity, consistency, and readability of the regulatory language. (CBSC, 2022) PRC § 25402.1 also requires the Energy Commission to support the performance standards with compliance tools for builders and building designers. The Alternative Calculation Method (ACM) Approval Manual adopted by regulation as an appendix of the Standards establishes requirements for input, output, and calculational uniformity in the computer programs used to demonstrate compliance with the Standards. From this, the Energy Commission develops and makes publicly available free, public domain building modeling software in order to enable compliance based on modeling of building efficiency and performance. The ACM Approval Manual also includes provisions for private firms seeking to develop compliance software for

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 2024

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

ENPLANNERS

4.19-17
approval by the Energy Commission, which further encourages flexibility and innovation. (CBSC, 2022)
California Solar Rights and Solar Shade Control Acts
The Solar Rights Act sets parameters for establishing solar easements, prohibits ordinances and private covenants which restrict solar systems, and requires communities to consider passive solar and natural heating and cooling opportunities in new construction. This Act is applicable to all California cities and counties. California’s solar access laws appear in the state’s Civil, Government, Health and Safety, and PRCs. California PRC § 25980 sets forth the Solar Shade Control Act, which encourages the use of trees and other natural shading except in cases where the shading may interfere with the use of active and passive solar systems. (EPIC, 2014; EPIC, 2010)
Alternative Fuels Plan
On September 24, 2009, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) adopted amendments to the “Pavley” regulations that reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in new passenger vehicles from 2009 through 2016. These amendments are part of California’s commitment toward a nation-wide program to reduce new passenger vehicle GHGs from 2012 through 2016. CARB’s September amendments will cement California’s enforcement of the Pavley rule starting in 2009 while providing vehicle manufacturers with new compliance flexibility.

The amendments will also prepare California to harmonize its rules with the federal rules for passenger vehicles. (CARB, n.d.)
The U.S. EPA granted California the authority to implement GHG emission reduction standards for new passenger cars, pickup trucks, and sport utility vehicles On June 30, 2009.

The first California request to implement GHG standards for passenger vehicles, known as a waiver request, was made in December 2005, and was denied by the U.S. EPA in March 2008.

That decision was based on a finding that California’s request to reduce GHG emissions from passenger vehicles did not meet the Clean Air Act requirement of showing that the waiver was needed to meet “compelling and extraordinary conditions.” (CARB, n.d.) The ARB’s Board originally approved regulations to reduce GHGs from passenger vehicles in September 2004, with the regulations to take effect in 2009. These regulations were authorized by the 2002 legislation AB 1493 (Pavley). (CARB, n.d.)
The regulations had been threatened by automaker lawsuits and were stalled by the U.S. EPA’s delay in reviewing and then initially denying California’s waiver request. The parties involved entered a May 19, 2009, agreement to resolve these issues. With the granting of the waiver on June 30, 2009, it is expected that the Pavley regulations will reduce GHG emissions from California passenger vehicles by about 22 percent in 2012 and about 30 percent in 2016, all while improving fuel efficiency and reducing motorists’ costs. (CARB, n.d.)

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

ENPLANNERS

4.19-18
The CARB has adopted a new approach to passenger vehicles – cars and light trucks – by combining the control of smog-causing pollutants and greenhouse gas emissions into a single coordinated package of standards. The new approach also includes efforts to support and accelerate the numbers of plug-in hybrids and zero-emission vehicles in California. (CARB, n.d.)
California Independent System Operator (ISO)
The California ISO is an independent public benefit corporation responsible for operating California’s long- distance electric transmission lines. The California ISO is led by a fivemember board appointment by the Governor and is also regulated by FERC. While transmission owners and private electric utilities own their lines, the California ISO operates the transmission system independently to ensure that electricity flows comply with federal operational standards. The California ISO analyzes current and future electrical demand and plans for any needed expansion or upgrade of the electric transmission system. (California ISO, n.d.)
California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC)
The CPUC establishes policies and rules for electricity and natural gas rates provided by private utilities in California such as Southern California Edison (SCE) and Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas). Public owned utilities such as the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP) do not fall under the CPUCs jurisdiction. The Digital Infrastructure and Video Competition Act of 2006 (DIVCA) established the CPUC as the sole cable/video TV franchising authority in the State of California. DIVCA took effect January 1, 2007.

The CPUC is overseen by five commissioners appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the state Senate. The CPUC’s responsibilities include regulating electric power procurement and generation, infrastructure oversight for electric transmission lines and natural gas pipelines and permitting of electrical transmission and substation facilities. (CPUC, n.d.) California Energy Commission (CEC)
The CEC is a planning agency which provides guidance on setting the state’s energy policy.

Responsibilities include forecasting electricity and natural gas demand, promoting and setting energy efficiency standards throughout the state, developing renewable energy resources and permitting thermal power plants 50 megawatts and larger. The CEC also has regulatory specific regulatory authority over publicly owned utilities to certify, monitor and verify eligible renewable energy resources procured. (CEC, n.d.)
SB 1389
SB 1389 (PRC §§ 25300–25323), adopted in 2002, requires the development of an integrated plan for electricity, natural gas, and transportation fuels. Under the bill, the CEC must adopt

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 2024

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

ENPLANNERS

4.19-19
and transmit to the Governor and Legislature an Integrated Energy Policy Report every two years. In 2018, the CEC decided to write the Integrated Energy Policy Report in two volumes.

The Volume I, which was published on August 1, 2018, highlights the implementation of California’s innovative policies and the role they have played in moving toward a clean energy economy. Volume II, which was adopted in February 2019, identifies several key energy issues and actions to address these issues and ensure the reliability of energy resources. (CA Legislative Info, n.d.)

REGIONAL REGULATIONS
County of Riverside MS4 Permit, Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP) and Local Implementation Plans (LIP) (NPDES Permit No. CAS618033).

LOCAL REGULATIONS
The City prepares and provides periodic updates to the water master plans that affect its water resources—the urban water management plan, groundwater recharge plans, and reclaimed water master plan.

City of Corona 2020 Urban Water Management Plan
The City has developed and regularly updates its comprehensive Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) to ensure strategic planning for addressing the water requirements of both the City and its Sphere of Influence (SOI). This plan is formulated to effectively manage the City’s water resources to surpass demand levels through 2040, based on an estimated population of 182,800 residents. By 2040, the City anticipates importing 21,110 acre-feet per year (afy) of water, having approximately 15,112 afy available in the Coldwater and Temescal basins, and possessing 10,000 afy of reclaimed water for non-potable purposes. The total projected water supply for 2040 is estimated to be 46,222 afy (Corona 2020).

The 20202 UWMP specifies that various stages of action can be taken by the urban water provider in response to shortages in water supply, including potential reductions of up to 50 percent in water supply. The 2020 UWMP lists five Water Conservation Stages; Stage 1 – Normal Water Supply, Stage 2 – Minimum Water Shortage, Stage 3 – Moderate Water Shortage, Stage 4 – Severe Water Shortage, and Stage 5 – Critical Water Shortage.

City of Corona Municipal Code
Chapter 8.20, Collection of Refuse and Recyclable Materials, provides requirements for collecting solid waste and recyclable materials.

City of Corona Municipal Code Chapter 13.16, Storm Drains City of Corona Municipal Code Chapter 13.27, Storm Water Management Discharge Controls

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

ENPLANNERS

4.19-20
Chapter 13.36, Water Conservation, of the City’s Municipal Code outlines the water shortage contingency measures identified in the UWMP.

City of Corona 2005 Water Master Plan
The City of Corona's 2005 Water Master Plan was crafted to outline the city's water distribution system, pinpoint any shortcomings within the system, and propose enhancements.

Recommendations for improvements were made to rectify these deficiencies and were subsequently included in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for funding and implementation. The CIP assesses project priorities according to system requirements and phases, serving as a strategic long-term guide for facilitating the construction of suggested projects to accommodate the city's growth and evolving demands.

City of Corona 2018 Reclaimed Water Master Plan
In July 2018, the City finalized its Reclaimed Water Master Plan (RWMP). This plan is designed to assist the City in fulfilling both present and future objectives regarding reclaimed water utilization. Furthermore, the RWMP seeks to ensure the City's readiness for the decommissioning of WRF 3 and the integration of the new Western Riverside County Regional Wastewater Authority (WRCRWA) treatment facility as an additional reclaimed water source.

The objectives outlined in the RWMP are in harmony with the goals and strategies outlined in the 2005 Water Master Plan. According to the 2018 RWMP, the current production of recycled water is estimated at 11.34 MGD, with an existing demand for reclaimed water at 2 MGD, primarily utilized for irrigation throughout the City (Fuscoe 2018).

City of Corona 2020–2040 General Plan
Land Use Element
Policy LU-1.4 Accommodate the types, densities, and mix of land uses that can be adequately supported by transportation and utility infrastructure (water, sewer, etc.) and public services (schools, parks, libraries, etc.)
Policy LU-4.5 Manage the timing of development and allow development to occur only when public infrastructure and services needed to support that development are available, will be provided concurrently, or are committed to be provided within a reasonable time frame.

Policy LU-9.10 Require that new residential development pay its fair share of the cost of capital improvements, public facilities, and services needed to serve that development.

Ensure that funding mechanisms for landscape maintenance and improvement are required for each.

Policy LU-22.4 Require that infrastructure and service improvements for proposed annexation areas do not create an undue burden on existing City of Corona infrastructure and services.

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 2024

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

ENPLANNERS

4.19-21
Policy LU-22.5 Encourage that, if an area annexes to the City of Corona, a community facilities district or similar financing district shall be established to fund the provision and maintenance of sewers, streets, and other public improvements and services.

Policy LU-22.10 Collaborate with local, county, and regional governmental agencies to provide water, sewer, public safety, fire response, and other appropriate municipal services; coordinate emergency response services through mutual and automatic aid agreements.

Housing Element (2021-2029)
Policy H-1.2 Promote specific plans and zoning map amendments that provide a variety of housing types and densities based on the suitability of the land, including the availability of infrastructure, the provision of adequate City services and recognition of environmental constraints.

Infrastructure Element
Policy IU-3.1 Review, evaluate, and update the City’s Sewer Master Plan and related capital improvement programs on a regular basis to plan for expansion and improvement of conveyance, storage, and treatment facilities.

Policy IU-3.2 Evaluate sewer infrastructure in areas where intensification of land use is anticipated to occur; coordinate capital improvements planning for service infrastructure with the direction, extent, and timing of growth.

Policy IU-3.3 Build, upgrade, maintain, and expand existing sewer collection and treatment facilities where existing systems are deficient in accordance with the Sewer Master Plan and state and federal standards.

Policy IU-3.4 Require that new development be connected to the municipal sewer system and ensure that adequate capacity is available for the treatment of generated flows and safe disposal of sludge.

Policy IU-3.5 As a condition of approval, require that all new development submit a sewer analysis to the satisfaction of the City of Corona prior to the issuance of building permits.

Policy IU-3.6 Restrict and prioritize sewer connections, if necessary, to comply with available treatment capacity.

Policy IU-3.7 Ensure that sewer connection fees and charges are reviewed annually and are sufficient to fully fund and support the construction, improvement, and rehabilitation of sewer facilities.

Policy IU-3.8 Require that new development be connected to the City’s sewer system.

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

ENPLANNERS

4.19-22
Policy IU-3.9 Continue to require all applicable industries/businesses to obtain sewer discharge permits from the City and to comply with the City's Waste Discharge Pretreatment and Source Control Program.

Policy IU-3.10 Continue to implement, as appropriate, the requirements of the NPDES and SCAQMD regulations, including requiring the use of Best Management Practices by businesses in the City.

Infrastructure Element
Policy IU-4.1 Review, evaluate, and regularly update the City’s Storm Drainage Master Plan and related capital improvement programs as a basis for the orderly planning, expansion, and improvement of facilities; implement improvements identified in the Drainage Master Plan.

Policy IU-4.2 Maintain and upgrade public storm drains and storage control facilities and construct or expand storm drain and flood control facilities to protect people and property from flooding and stormwater runoff. Implement improvements identified in the City’s Drainage Master Plan.

Policy IU-4.3 Designate, preserve, and acquire land, as necessary, for storm drainage and storage control facilities. As necessary, require the reservation of rights-of-way and easements for designated water related infrastructure facilities as a condition of project approval.

Policy IU-4.4 Evaluate the adequacy of stormwater conveyance and storage control facilities in areas where intensification of land use is anticipated to occur; coordinate capital improvements planning for infrastructure with the direction, extent, and timing of growth.

Policy IU-4.5 Review development proposals for projects within the City’s Sphere of Influence and encourage Riverside County to not approve any project that cannot be accommodated with an adequate drainage system.

Policy IU-4.6 Annually review the development charge, acquisition of service charge, and monthly service charges in order to ensure that adequate fees and charges are collected to fund the operation, maintenance, and repair of existing facilities and construction of new facilities.

Policy IU-4.7 Require adherence to City regulatory stormwater quality measures and, if needed, take necessary enforcement action(s) to eliminate illicit connections and discharges to/from the stormwater system.

Policy IU-5.1 Ensure that existing and new development does not directly degrade or indirectly contribute to the degradation of surface waters or the groundwater system.

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 2024

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

ENPLANNERS

4.19-23
Policy IU-5.2 Reduce pollutant loading through passive treatment systems such as vegetated filter strips, grass swales, and infiltration/ sedimentation areas in suitable open space areas, overland flow channels, and landscaping adjacent to parking lots and streets.

Policy IU-5.3 In new developments, minimize the amount of impervious area that is directly connected to piped or channelized drainage systems.

Policy IU-5.4 Evaluate any existing environmental degradation or potential degradation from current or planned storm drain and storage control facilities in wetlands or other sensitive environments.

Policy IU-5.5 Require that development projects consider the appropriateness of the channelization of stormwater runoff to facilitate its possible capture and reuse for on-site irrigation and other purposes.

Policy IU-5.6 Implement environmentally and economically efficient stormwater treatment systems, whenever practical (such as artificial marshland treatment).

Policy IU-5.7 Require developers to obtain a NPDES permit prior to moving construction equipment onto a development site. The NPDES permit shall be retained at the construction site throughout the construction period, and a copy shall be filed with the City Engineer.

Policy IU-5.8 During construction projects, ensure compliance with all terms and conditions outlined in the NPDES permit, including the implementation of the latest best management practices and determination of need for any additional water quality management plans to reduce pollutants and urban runoff flows to the maximum extent practicable.

Policy IU-5.9 Require that new developments employ the most efficient drainage technology to control drainage and minimize damage to environmentally sensitive areas.

Policy IU-5.10 Require that individual project owners and operators handle, store, apply, and dispose of all pest control, herbicide, insecticide, and other similar substances according to all federal, state, and local regulations.

Policy IU-6.1 Provide an adequate and orderly system for collection and recycling or disposal of solid waste for new and existing development in the City and sphere of influence.

Policy IU-6.2 Monitor the adequacy of solid waste collection and recycling, including organic and electronic waste, for commercial, industrial, and residential developments for compliance with state law.

Policy IU-6.3 Coordinate with Riverside County to ensure the City’s continued use of the El Sobrante Landfill and adherence to county, state, and federal environmental regulations and local priorities.

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

ENPLANNERS

4.19-24
Policy IU-6.4 Encourage and support local, regional, and statewide efforts to reduce the solid waste stream; implement a waste reduction and recycling program within all City offices and facilities.

Policy IU-6.5 Continue to operate and expand source reduction, reuse, recycling, and composting efforts to continue to reduce waste generation citywide and achieve state-mandated waste diversion goals.

Policy IU-6.6 Continue and enhance public educational programs promoting reuse, recycling, composting, and the safe disposal of waste.

Policy IU-6.7 Continue to work with providers and businesses to educate the community and to provide household hazardous material, used oil, and electronic waste collection for the community.

4.19.5 PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES
No Project Design Features are proposed for the Modified Project.

4.19.6 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Based on the relevant CEQA Guidelines as currently implemented by the City of Corona, significant utilities and service systems impacts would occur if the proposed Project or any Project-related component would:

Threshold UTL-1 Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? Threshold UTL-2 Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonable foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years?
Threshold UTL-3 Result in a determination by wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
Threshold UTL-4 Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
Threshold UTL-5 Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 2024

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

ENPLANNERS

4.19-25

METHODOLOGY
The following discussion analyzes potential impacts to utilities and service systems based on This will involve a baseline assessment to establish the existing capacity and limitations of water, wastewater, stormwater, and solid waste systems in the Project area. Data will be gathered from relevant agencies and service providers, along with information from the City's 2020-2040 General Plan and other publicly available sources. In addition, this baseline data will be used to compare the anticipated Modified Project demands on these utilities. This will allow for a qualitative assessment of potential impacts, highlighting areas where the Project may cause strain on existing systems.

4.19.7 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE MODIFIED

PROJECT
Impacts
Would the
Modified Project
result in new or
more severe
impacts
requiring
revisions to the
Prior EIR?
Would the
Modified Project
be implemented
under changed
circumstances
resulting in new
or more severe
impacts
requiring
revisions to the
Prior EIR?
Is there new
information that
would result in
new or more
severe impacts
from the
Modified Project
requiring
revisions to the
Prior EIR?
Would the
Modified Project
result in
eliminated,
reduced, or no
changes to
impacts and no
changes to the
Prior EIR are
required?
Would the project:

UTL-1 Require or result in the
relocation or construction
of new or expanded water,
wastewater treatment or
storm water drainage,
electric power, natural
gas, or
telecommunications
facilities, the construction
or relocation of which
could cause significant
environmental effects?
UTL-2 Have sufficient water
supplies available to serve
the project and reasonable
foreseeable future
development during
normal, dry and multiple
dry years?

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

ENPLANNERS

4.19-26
Impacts
Would the
Modified Project
result in new or
more severe
impacts
requiring
revisions to the
Prior EIR?
Would the
Modified Project
be implemented
under changed
circumstances
resulting in new
or more severe
impacts
requiring
revisions to the
Prior EIR?
Is there new
information that
would result in
new or more
severe impacts
from the
Modified Project
requiring
revisions to the
Prior EIR?
Would the
Modified Project
result in
eliminated,
reduced, or no
changes to
impacts and no
changes to the
Prior EIR are
required?
Would the project:

UTL-3 Result in a determination
by wastewater treatment
provider which serves or
may serve the project that
it has adequate capacity to
serve the project’s
projected demand in
addition to the provider’s
existing commitments?
UTL-4 Generate solid waste in
excess of State or local
standards, or in excess of
the capacity of local
infrastructure, or
otherwise impair the
attainment of solid waste
reduction goals?
UTL-5 Comply with federal, state,
and local management and
reduction statutes and
regulations related to solid
waste?

IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE MODIFIED PROJECT
IMPACT UTL-1 Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
Eliminated, Reduced, or No Changes to Impacts and No Changes to the Prior EIR are Required.

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 2024

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

ENPLANNERS

4.19-27
Water
As previously stated, water services including domestic water, irrigation, and fire suppression to the GRRSP Planning Area will be provided by the City of Corona CUD. A connection will be made to the existing underground water line located at the Project entrance on Green River Road. The tie-in would be designed and coordinated through CUD during the building permitting process to ensure the water distribution system meets peak flow rate and fire flow requirements. The new onsite water system would convey water supplies to the proposed development and landscaping through plumbing/landscaping fixtures that are compliant with the CalGreen Plumbing Code and the City’s Municipal Code Section 17.70.070, Landscaping, and Chapter 13.14, Water and Sewer Regulations and would be reviewed for compliance by the City during Project plan check. The construction activities related to the onsite water infrastructure that would be needed to serve the proposed structures is included as part of the Modified Project and would not result in any physical environmental effects beyond those identified throughout this DSEIR. For example, construction emissions for excavation and installation of the water infrastructure is included in Sections 4.3, Air Quality and 4.8, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and noise volumes from these activities are evaluated in Section

4.13, Noise. In addition, Project implementation would not require off-site improvements.

Therefore, the Project would not result in the construction of new or expanded off-site water facilities. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Wastewater Treatment
As stated in the Preliminary Wastewater Report, the City’s 2005 Sewer Master Plan determined the existing 10-inch gravity sewer lines in Green River Road and Palisades Drive west of the existing SDO LS are identified as being deficient under existing conditions.

Furthermore, the existing 10-inch gravity sewer lines in Green River Road and Palisades Drive west of the existing SDO LS are identified as being deficient under existing conditions.

In anticipation of the increased sewer flows associated with future developments throughout the City of Corona, the Preliminary Wastewater Report states the Department of Water and Power has proposed several Capital Improvement Projects to address current and future deficiencies in the existing sewer system. In addition, the City has plans to construct a new lift station at the intersection of Green River Road and Palisades Drive to replace and upgrade the existing SDO LS. The proposed lift station will accommodate flows from existing and future developments, which include the proposed sewer flows from the development of the Modified Project. The new lift station is included in the City’s Fiscal Year 2021 through Fiscal year 2025 Capital Improvement Program and also includes 2,600 linear feet of 12-inch gravity sewer and 1,500 lineal feet of 12-inch force main. Such improvements would be required to be analyzed under current CEQA guidelines.

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

ENPLANNERS

4.19-28
The Project would install 8-inch sewer lines within the BPI portion of the site that would connect to the existing sewer sub within an existing public utility easement. The construction activities related to installation of the onsite sewer infrastructure that would serve the Modified Project, is included as part of the Modified Project and would not result in any physical environmental effects beyond those identified throughout this Draft SEIR. For example, analysis of construction emissions for excavation and installation of the sewer infrastructure is included in Section 4.3, Air Quality and 4.8, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and noise volumes from these activities are evaluated in Section 4.13, Noise. As the Modified Project includes facilities to serve the proposed development, it would not result in the need for construction of other new wastewater facilities or expansions, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

Storm Water Drainage
As discussed subsequently in Section 4.10, Hydrology and Water Quality the Modified Project site would include development of approximately 36.65 acres of impermeable surfaces, which would be an increase from the existing undeveloped vacant impervious surface area. Project site existing drainages flow from the south to a low point within the northern portion of the site, ultimately conveyed into the existing drainage pipelines/culverts crossing Green River Road and to SR 91.

Use of the subsurface infiltration chamber would regulate the rate and velocity of stormwater flows and would control the amount of discharge into the off-site drainage system. As discussed above, the Modified Project would not result in significant impacts related to water quality. In addition, the drainage facilities proposed for the BPI development have been sized to adequately accommodate the stormwater flows from the proposed development and are consistent with the County drainage plans and MS4 permit requirements. The proposed oversized infiltration system would accommodate existing stormwater infrastructure capacity by holding the entire design capture volume in the chamber and allow high flows to discharge from the site at a reduced flowrate. The existing southerly drainage pattern is not maintained; however, times of concentration are preserved through the use of dual underground infiltration systems. With implementation of Modified Project, estimated stormwater flows will be adequately accommodated. Therefore, the Project would not result in the construction of new or expanded off-site storm water facilities. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Electric Power\
SCE would provide electrical service to the Modified Project. An on-site connection to the existing electrical supply and distribution network within the area surrounding the Project would be made during construction and operation. The existing electrical supply is underground and located at the south side of the Project entrance at Green River Road and tie-

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 2024

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

ENPLANNERS

4.19-29
in would be identified prior to construction with proper mark out. Compliance with the existing building code and SCE construction and design regulations would ensure the Modified Project’s connection to the existing electrical infrastructure is conducted safely and provides adequate service. Therefore, the Project would not result in the construction of new or expanded off-site electrical facilities. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required
Natural Gas
SoCalGas would provide natural gas services to the Project. Similar to the previous services mentioned, on-site connection to the existing nature gas infrastructure would be made during construction for operation. The existing gas line runs under Green River Road east to west and tie-in would be made at the Project entrance at Street A. Compliance with the existing building code and SoCalGas construction and design regulations would ensure the Modified Project’s connection to the existing natural gas infrastructure is conducted safely and provides adequate service. Therefore, the Project would not result in the construction of new or expanded off-site natural gas facilities. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Telecommunications
Telecommunications facilities within the Project area are not owned by the City but are owned and operated by multiple service providers including AT&T and Time Warner Cable. As with buildout of the Modified Project including the proposed BPI development, Project implementation would not result in a significant impact to telecommunications facilities, as each individual future developer would be required to contract with the respective telecommunications company and coordinate with the City to connect to such facilities, as required by applicable regulations and requirements. Therefore, Project implementation would not result in the need for construction of other new telecommunication facilities or expansions, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects.

Therefore, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the Modified Project when compared to those identified in the 2001 EIR for the Approved Project.

Mitigation Measure
No mitigation measures are required.

IMPACT UTL-2 Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonable foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years?
Eliminated, Reduced, or No Changes to Impacts and No Changes to the Prior EIR are Required.

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

ENPLANNERS

4.19-30
According to the City of Corona 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), CUD receives water supplies from treated surface water, untreated surface water, and desalinated brackish groundwater. Further, through a combination of these resources, the UWMP indicates that the City has the ability to meet current and projected water demands through 2045 during normal, historic single-dry and historic multiple-dry year periods (UWMP 2020).

The UWMP applied SCAG future population projections to estimate overall water demand from 2020 to 2045 throughout the City for all land use types (residential, commercial, industrial, etc.). However, according to the WSA prepared for the Modified Project, the water demand for the Modified Project was not explicitly accounted for in the 2020 UWMP. The UWMP only considered future demands associated with population growth and minor infill projects. For this reason, water demand for the Modified Project was calculated independently within the WSA.

According to the UWMP, projected normal 2025 water use in the City of Corona for Commercial/ Institutional uses was projected in the amount of 3,078 AF, Residential Single Family was 18,839 AF, and total water use was 37,555 AF (UWMP 2020). Furthermore, the projected normal 2045 total water use was 38,351, while the single dry year demand in 2025 was 39,358 and 40,192 in 2045. According to the UWMP, the total supply for water during normal and dry years is 46,222 AF.

As stated in the WSA, the Modified Project’s water demand during normal years would be 104 AF per year. Furthermore, the WSA determined Based on the finding that there is sufficient supply under normal year, single dry year and multiple dry year conditions through 2045 due to the availability of water resources. Furthermore, the Modified Project would also limit water use by inclusion of low-flow plumbing and irrigation fixtures, pursuant to the California Title 24 requirements and would comply with City permits and fees as necessary. As a result, the Modified Project would have sufficient water supplies available to serve the Project, and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years, and impacts would be less than significant.

Therefore, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the Modified Project when compared to those identified in the 2001 EIR for the Approved Project.

Mitigation Measure
No mitigation measures are required.

IMPACT UTL-3 Result in a determination by wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 2024

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

ENPLANNERS

4.19-31
Eliminated, Reduced, or No Changes to Impacts and No Changes to the Prior EIR are Required.

No septic systems are proposed as part of the Modified Project. As discussed under the analysis of Threshold UTL-1, the Modified Project would be provided sanitary sewer service by the CUD. Impacts associated with the Modified Project’s proposed sewer improvements are inherent to the Modified Project’s construction phase, and impacts have been evaluated throughout this SEIR under the appropriate subject headings (e.g., air quality, biological resources, etc.). Where significant direct or cumulative impacts are identified, mitigation measures have been imposed to reduce the Project’s impacts to the maximum feasible extent.

There are no environmental impacts that would occur specifically related to the Project’s proposed sewer improvements that have not already been addressed in pertinent sections of this SEIR. Additionally, the analysis of Impact UTL-1, demonstrates that the CUD would not need to expand any wastewater treatment facilities as a result of the proposed Project. As such, with the mitigation measures specified in this SEIR, Project impacts due to the proposed construction of sewer facilities would be less than significant.

Therefore, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the Modified Project when compared to those identified in the 2001 EIR for the Approved Project.

Mitigation Measure
No mitigation measures are required.

IMPACT UTL-4 Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
Eliminated, Reduced, or No Changes to Impacts and No Changes to the Prior EIR are Required.

Solid waste generated by the Modified Project would be disposed of at either the El Sobrante Landfill, Lamb Canyon Landfill, or Badlands Landfill. As previously indicated, the El Sobrante Landfill is currently permitted to receive 16,054 tpd, while the average daily tonnage in December 2022 was 9,291.25 tpd. The Lamb Canyon Landfill is permitted to receive 5,000 tpd, while data from December 2022 shows that the Lamb Canyon Landfill received a daily average of approximately 1,890.14 tpd. The Badlands Landfill is permitted to receive 4,800 tpd, while in January 2023 the Badlands Landfill received an average of 3,166.88 tpd. (RCDWR, 2022a RCDWR, 2022b; RCDWR, 2023)
As stated in the City’s 2020-2040 General Plan, in 2015, the latest year for which data was approved, the target disposal rates for Corona were 8.6 pounds per day (ppd) per resident, and

18.6 ppd per employee; actual disposal rates in 2015—6.7 ppd per resident and 15.5 ppd per employee—were below target rates and thus were consistent with AB 939 (CalRecycle 2019f).

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

ENPLANNERS

4.19-32
As stated in Section 4.14, Population and Housing, the Modified Project would result in approximately 113 residents and approximately 1,125 total employees. The Modified Project’s solid waste generation, buildout and occupancy of the Modified Project is estimated to produce approximately 10.92 tpd of solid waste, or approximately 3,986.3 tons per year (tpy).

Compliance with AB 939, which applies to the Modified Project and the City, up to 50% of its solid waste would need to be diverted from area landfills. In conformance with the City’s 2020- 2040 General Plan and AB 939, the Project Applicant is required to work with future contract refuse haulers to implement recycling and waste reduction programs for solid wastes.

Based on the average daily tonnage received at these landfills in June 2022, the Project’s daily generation of solid waste would represent 0.1% of the tpd permitted to receive at the El Sobrante Landfill. Because the Modified Project would generate a relatively small amount of solid waste per day as compared to the permitted daily capacities and average daily tonnage for the El Sobrante Landfill, it is anticipated that these regional landfill facilities would have sufficient daily capacity to accept solid waste generated by the Modified Project. As such, because regional solid waste facilities would have adequate capacity to handle solid waste generated by the Modified Project’s construction and operational phases, impacts would be less than significant.

Therefore, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the Modified Project when compared to those identified in the 2001 EIR for the Approved Project.

IMPACT UTL-5 Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Eliminated, Reduced, or No Changes to Impacts and No Changes to the Prior EIR are Required.

Federal, State, and local statutes and regulations regarding solid waste generation, transport, and disposal are intended to decrease solid waste generation through mandatory reductions in solid waste quantities (e.g., through recycling and composting of green waste) and the safe and efficient transport of solid waste. The Modified Project solid waste needs would be served by a contract waste hauler that complies with State standards. Additionally, new development projects approved by the City of Corona pursuant to the 2020-2045 General Plan would contain storage areas for recyclable materials in conformance with California Public Resources Code Sections 42900 et seq., and City of Corona Municipal Code Chapter 8.20, Collection of Refuse and Recyclable Materials. Furthermore, solid waste diversion programs in the City would continue operating and would have adequate capacity to accept all future wastes and recyclables to reduce landfilled waste including buildout of the Modified Project. With compliance to all applicable solid waste statutes and regulations, impacts related to solid waste statutes and regulations would be less than significant.

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 2024

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

ENPLANNERS

4.19-33
Therefore, no new or substantially greater impacts would occur with implementation of the Modified Project when compared to those identified in the 2001 EIR for the Approved Project.

Mitigation Measure
No mitigation measures are required.

4.19.8 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE MODIFIED

PROJECT
Less Than Significant Impact/No Changes or No New Information Requiring Preparation of an EIR.

The cumulative study area used for the analysis of water and wastewater includes areas within CUD’s service area for water and wastewater services, and is based on the buildout of the City’s 2020-2040 General Plan and the general plans of cities within CUD service area. The cumulative study area for solid waste comprises western Riverside County, as all areas of western Riverside County are served by WMIE, and is based on the buildout of the City’s 2020-2040 General Plan and the general plans of cities within western Riverside County. For the remaining issue areas, the cumulative impact analysis considers development of the Project in conjunction with other development projects and planned development in the vicinity of the GRRSP Planning Area.

As discussed under the analysis of Impact UTL-1, the Modified Project would require a number of improvements related to water, wastewater treatment, and storm drainage systems, although such improvements are inherent to the Modified Project’s construction phase as discussed in the 2001 EIR. Cumulatively-considerable impacts associated with Modified Project construction activities have been evaluated throughout this SEIR, and where necessary mitigation measures have been identified to reduce the Modified Project’s cumulativelyconsiderable effects to the maximum feasible extent. There are no components of the Modified Project’s proposed water, wastewater, or storm drainage systems that could result in impacts not already evaluated by other sections of this SEIR. Accordingly, impacts associated with the construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment, and stormwater drainage systems would be less than cumulatively considerable.

The analysis of Impact UTL-2. demonstrates that the CUD would have sufficient water supplies available to serve the Project as well as other reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. The City’s UWMP and the Modified Project’s WSA (Appendix Q) evaluate the water demands of both the Modified Project and other cumulative developments within CUD’s service area, and the Modified Project is well below the growth assumptions utilized in the CUD for the Project site. Because the UWMP demonstrates that the CUD has the capacity to serve future development within its service area, cumulatively-considerable impacts to water supply would be less than significant.

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

ENPLANNERS

4.19-34
As discussed under the analysis of Impact UTL-3. And UTL-4, the Modified Project would require a number of improvements to provide sewer service to the Project site, although impacts associated with such improvements are inherent to the Modified Project’s construction phase. Cumulatively-considerable impacts associated with Modified Project construction activities have been evaluated throughout this SEIR, and where necessary mitigation measures have been identified to reduce the Modified Project’s cumulatively-considerable effects to the maximum feasible extent. There are no components of the Modified Project’s proposed wastewater improvements that would result in impacts not already evaluated by other sections of this SEIR. Accordingly, impacts associated with the construction of new or expanded wastewater treatment conveyance facilities would be less-than-cumulatively considerable.

The Modified Project’s wastewater generation would not result in or require the expansion of the existing facilities. Although the Project and other cumulative developments ultimately would contribute to the need for expanded capacity, impacts associated with such expansion would be subject to CEQA once plans for such expansion have been prepared by the CUD. As no such plans are currently available, it would be speculative to evaluate potential cumulatively-considerable impacts associated with the proposed expansion (CEQA Guidelines § 15145). As such, Modified Project impacts due to wastewater capacity would be less-thancumulatively considerable.

As previously discussed in the analysis provided under Impact UTL-5, solid waste generated by construction and operation of the Modified Project would represent nominal proportions of the daily disposal capacity at the El Sobrante Landfill, Lamb Canyon Landfill, and/or Badlands Landfill. The landfills are currently projected to remain open until as far into the future as 2051 (El Sobrante Landfill) and have sufficient daily capacity to handle solid waste generated by the Modified Project and other cumulative developments both during construction and longterm operation. The Modified Project would not directly result in the need for expanded solid waste disposal facilities, as the El Sobrante Landfill, Lamb Canyon Landfill, and Badlands Landfill have sufficient existing capacity to handle solid waste generated by the Modified Project. Rather, the Modified Project’s incremental contribution to solid waste generation may contribute to an ultimate need for expanding the solid waste disposal facilities that would serve the Modified Project and/or the construction of additional solid waste disposal facilities.

Moreover, it is possible that as other developments in the region are proposed, the WMIE may opt to construct new solid waste disposal facilities to serve those developments, and such facilities may or may not receive solid waste generated by the Modified Project. Although the Modified Project has the potential to cumulatively contribute to the demand for new or expanded solid waste disposal facilities, the construction of which could significantly impact the environment, it is too speculative for evaluation in the absence of a proposed expansion or development plan (CEQA Guidelines, 14 CCR § 15145). Therefore, the Modified Project’s cumulatively-considerable impacts to solid waste disposal facilities are evaluated as less than significant.

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 2024

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

ENPLANNERS

4.19-35
The Modified Project would adhere to regulations set forth by local and State regulations (including AB 341 and AB 939) during both construction and long-term operations. Other cumulative developments would also be required to comply with such regulations. As such, the Modified Project as well as other cumulative developments in the area would not result in cumulative impacts with respect to compliance with federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid wastes. Impacts would be less-than-cumulatively considerable.

Cumulative impacts associated with the provision of facilities for electricity, natural gas, communications systems, stormwater drainage, street lighting, maintenance of facilities, construction of off-site sewer and water lines, and other governmental services are inherent to the Project’s construction phase and have been evaluated throughout the appropriate issue areas in this EIR. In all cases, where cumulatively-considerable impacts associated with any Project component are identified, mitigation measures have been imposed to reduce such impacts to the maximum feasible extent. Accordingly, cumulatively-considerable impacts associated with the provision of utility facilities to serve the proposed Project would be less than significant.

4.19.9 MITIGATION MEASURES IDENTIFIED IN PRIOR EIR APPLICABLE TO

MODIFIED PROJECT
The following mitigation measures related to utilities and service systems, as defined in Section 4.10.9, were included in the certified 2001 EIR.

4.11.2.A: All proposed storm drain facilities and equipment shall be designed, installed and maintained in a manner to convey peak flows estimated for the project.

Drainage plans shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits.

4.11.2B: On-site detention basins shall be constructed to accommodate storm flows from the project site. Such facilities shall be designed, installed and maintained in a manner to reduce on-site runoff to a level that can be accommodated by the existing culverts beneath Green River Road. All required drainage structures shall be designed, installed, and maintained in accordance with applicable City of Corona standards.

4.19.10 NEW MITIGATION MEASURES APPLICABLE TO MODIFIED PROJECT No new mitigation measures related to utilities and service systems are required.

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

ENPLANNERS

4.19-36
This Page Intentionally Left Blank

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

WILDFIRE

ENPLANNERS

4.20-1

4.20 WILDFIRE

4.20.1 INTRODUCTION
This section of the Draft SEIR assesses the potential impacts associated with wildfire from the implementation of the Proposed Project. The impact discussions for each specific impact topic include a comparison to the impacts evaluated for the Approved Project consistent with the conditions detailed in CEQA Guidelines 15162 regarding a Subsequent EIR. The discussion describes the regulatory framework and existing conditions, identifies criteria used to determine impact significance, provides an analysis of the potential impacts associated with wildfire, and identifies methods to mitigate any potentially significant impacts of the Proposed Project.

Mitigation measures are recommended as necessary to reduce significant wildfire impacts.

One NOP comment letter (Adam Ruiz) was received pertaining to this topic and two Public Scoping Meeting comments (Bruce Fields and Jeffrey Meissner) were received pertaining to this topic.

This section of the Draft SEIR is based on the Fire Protection Plan prepared for the Proposed Project dated June 24, 2020, revised April 7, 2023 (Appendix P).

4.20.2 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES FROM THE 2001 EIR
The 2001 certified EIR included an Initial Study used to screen or focus the 2001 EIR to include only those impacts needing further analysis or impacts for which the Initial Study identified readily available mitigation. For Wildfire, the Initial Study screened out further assessment of fire hazard impacts, and therefore a detailed analysis of Wildfire was not included in the 2001 EIR. The basis for screening out wildfire hazards from further analysis is because the GRRSP includes Development Regulations and Design Guidelines requiring preparation and implementation within the Planning Area.

The Project impact analysis related to wildfire are summarized as follows:
e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees? Abundant fuel in the form of native vegetation in the foothills was identified in close proximity to the Project, posing a significant wildfire hazard to the Project. Consequently, the certified EIR requires the Approved Project to prepare and implement a Fuel Modification Plan and Program to address and mitigate wildfire hazard potential in the vicinity of the Project. The requires The certified EIR requires implementation of the Fuel Modification Plan and Program prior to grading of any uses within the Specific Plan.

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

WILDFIRE

ENPLANNERS

4.20-2

4.20.3 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Modified Project site is located within the western portion of the City and in the response area of Corona Fire Department (CFD), Fire Station 5. According to CAL FIRE and the City’s Safety Element, the Modified Project area is within a Local Responsibility Area (LRA) designated as a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Area (FHSZ).

The Modified Project area is located south of SR 91, southwest of Dominguez Ranch Road, and southeast of Fresno Road. Green River Road bisects a small portion of the GRRSP Planning Area in an east-west alignment. The Modified Project site is bounded by undeveloped land on the north, partially developed land to the east, the 91 Freeway to the west, and undeveloped land to the south. Further to the south, is the Cleveland National Forest. The Open Space and Estate Residential portions of the Project are located within the foothills of the Santa Ana Mountains. The BPI portion of the Modified Project is located at the base of these foothills. Wildland fuels in the form of native vegetation in the foothills surround the Modified Project site.

4.20.4 EXISTING REGULATIONS, PLANS, PROGRAMS, AND POLICIES

FEDERAL
National Fire Protection Association Standards
National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) codes, standards, recommended practices, and guides are developed through a consensus standards development process approved by the American National Standards Institute. NFPA standards are recommended (advisory) guidelines in fire protection but are not laws or codes unless adopted or referenced as such by the California Fire Code or local fire agency. Specific standards applicable to wildland fire hazards include but are not limited to the following:
• NFPA 1141, Fire Protection Infrastructure for Land Development in Wildlands • NFPA 1142, Water Supplies for Suburban and Rural Fire Fighting • NFPA 1143, Wildland Fire Management
• NFPA 1144, Reducing Structure Ignition Hazards from Wildland Fire • NFPA 1710, Standard for the Organization and Deployment of Fire Suppression Operations, Emergency Medical Operations
STATE
California Building Code
The California Building Code requires the installation and maintenance of smoke alarms in residential dwelling units as follows (Title 24, Part 2, Section 907.2.11.2, of the California Code of Regulations): “Smoke alarms shall be installed and maintained on the ceiling or wall outside of each separate sleeping area in the immediate vicinity of bedrooms. In each room

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

WILDFIRE

ENPLANNERS

4.20-3
used for sleeping purposes, and in each story within a dwelling unit. The smoke alarms shall be interconnected.”
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
CAL FIRE is dedicated to the fire protection and stewardship of over 31 million acres of California's wildlands. The Board of Forestry and Fire Protection is a regulatory body in CAL FIRE. It is responsible for developing the general forest policy of the state, for determining the guidance policies of the Department, and for representing the state’s interest in federal forestland in California. The Board of Forestry and Fire Protection also promulgates regulations and reviews General Plan Safety Elements that are adopted by local government for compliance with statutes. Together, the Board of Forestry and Fire Protection and CAL FIRE protect and enhance the forest resources of the wildland areas of California that are not under federal jurisdiction.

California Fire Code
The California Fire Code is a series of building, property, and lifeline codes in the California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Chapter 9. The California Fire Code contains fire safety-related building standards, such as construction standards, vehicular and emergency access, fire hydrants and fire flow, and sprinkler requirements. Specific chapters relevant to wildfire include Chapter 49, Requirements for Wildland-Urban Interface, and Chapter 7A of the California Building Code, Materials and Construction Methods for Exterior Wildfire Exposure.

California Government Code
The State of California maintains responsibility for the prevention and suppression of wildfires on land outside incorporated boundaries of a city. In 1991, the State Legislature adopted the Bates Bill (California Government Code, Sections 51175–51189) following the fires in the Oakland Hills. The bill requires CAL FIRE to identify and classify areas in local responsibility areas that have a “very high fire severity” hazard for wildfires. Local responsibility areas are areas where local governments have the primary responsibility for preventing and suppressing fires. A local agency is required to adopt CAL FIRE’s findings within 120 days of receiving recommendations from CAL FIRE, pursuant to California Government Code, Section 51178(b), or propose modifications in accordance with state law..

California Office of State Fire Marshal
The California Office of the State Fire Marshal supports the mission of CAL FIRE by focusing on fire prevention. Its fire safety responsibilities include regulating buildings in which people live, congregate, or are confined; by controlling substances and products which may, in and of themselves, or by their misuse, cause injuries, death, and destruction by fire; by providing statewide direction for fire prevention within wildland areas; by regulation hazardous liquid

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

WILDFIRE

ENPLANNERS

4.20-4
pipelines; by developing and reviewing regulations and building standards; and by providing training and education in fire protection methods and responsibilities. These achievements are accomplished through major programs including engineering, education, enforcement, and support from the State Board of Fire Services.

California Public Resources Code
The State Fire Marshal is mandated to classify lands within State Responsibility Areas into Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZ). There are three FHSZs designated as Moderate, High and Very High. The Board of Forestry and Fire Protection is authorized in the California Public Resources Code to adopt minimum fire safety standards for new construction in FHSZs in State Responsibility Areas. The Board of Forestry and Fire Protection publishes its fire safety regulations in the California Code of Regulations, Title 14. These standards may differ from those in Appendix D of the California Fire Code. Fire-safe regulations currently address the following:
• Article 1: Administration of ordinance and defensible space measures (Chapter 49) • Article 2: Emergency access and egress standards (roadways) (Appendix D) • Article 3: Standards for signs identifying streets, roads, and buildings (Chapter 5) • Article 4: Emergency water standards for fire use (Appendix B, BB) • Article 5: Fuel modification standards (Chapter 49)
Local ordinances adopted by local governments cannot be less restrictive than the provisions in state law. These regulations would be applied in state responsibility areas outside of the City’s boundaries, such as the sphere of influence and surrounding unincorporated lands.

REGIONAL
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, County of Riverside Unit Strategic Plan
CAL FIRE prepares a California Fire Strategic Plan to govern operations statewide. The California Strategic Plan is implemented through individual “unit plans” that are prepared for different regions of the state. CAL FIRE’s fire suppression operations are organized into 21 units that geographically follow county lines. CAL FIRE adopted a County of Riverside Unit Strategic Plan that covers the County with input from applicable federal, State, City, and County agencies. The plan sets forth the agency’s priorities for the prevention, protection, and suppression of wildfires. The overall goal of the plan is to reduce total costs and losses from wildland fire in the unit by protecting assets at risk through focused pre-fire management prescriptions, increasing initial attack success. The last plan was updated in 2023.

County of Riverside Multi-Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan The County’s Multi-Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) identifies the County’s hazards, reviews and assesses past disaster occurrences, estimates the probability of

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

WILDFIRE

ENPLANNERS

4.20-5
future occurrences, and sets goals to mitigate potential risks to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to people and property from natural and human-made hazards. The LHMP contains mitigation strategies, from the Safety Element of the Riverside County General Plan (2015).

LOCAL
City of Corona 2020–2040 General Plan
Public Safety Element
Goal PS-9. Through fire prevention and educational efforts, promote participation, voluntary compliance and community awareness of fire safety issues in order to reduce the incidence and severity of fire and related emergencies and loss.

Policy PS-9.1. Continue to review and adopt the most recent edition of the California Building Standards Code (Title 24), including local amendments, to ensure the use of the latest technology and building standards in the city.

Policy PS-9.4. Maintain safe and accessible evacuation routes throughout the community; take precautions and ensure backup or mitigations for routes crossing high hazard areas (e.g., flood, seismic, high fire, etc.).

Policy PS-9.5. Work cooperatively with city departments, community groups, and individual homeowners to ensure that vegetation management is being maintained in the designated fuel modification areas.

Goal PS-10. Reduce fire risk to life and property through effective land use planning and compliance with federal, state, local laws, ordinances, and standards.

Policy PS-10.1. Locate, when feasible, new essential public facilities outside of high fire risk areas; if not feasible, require construction and other methods to harden and minimize damage for existing/planned facilities in such areas.

Policy PS-10.2. Require all improved and new homes, structures, and facilities in the very high fire hazard severity zones to adhere to additional fire-safe design standards consistent with state law and local practice.

Policy PS-10.6. Require fuel modification plans and vegetation clearance standards for development in VHFHSZs to protect structures from wildfire, protect wildlands from structure fires, and provide safe access routes for the community and firefighters within the project boundary, which may be extended pursuant to required findings when in accordance with state law, local ordinance, rule or regulation and no feasible mitigation measures are possible.

City of Corona Municipal Code
The Corona Municipal Code covers a broad range of regulations that address building construction codes, roadway access and egress, building signage, and sprinkler requirements,

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

WILDFIRE

ENPLANNERS

4.20-6
among other aspects, including Chapter 15.16, Fire Hazard Severity Zones, and outlines the authority of the Fire Chief in determining VHFHSZs and creating a VHFHSZ Map in the City.

The CFD and City building department staff work together to regulate requirements for development in the high fire hazard severity zones.

Corona Emergency Operations Plan
The City has prepared an Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) to address the City’s planned response to natural disasters, technological incidents, and national security emergencies. The EOP does not address normal day-to-day emergencies or the well-established and routine procedures used in coping with such emergencies. The EOP’s operational concepts focus on potential large- scale disasters that can generate unique situations requiring unusual emergency responses. The EOP’s emergency management goals are as follows (City of Corona 2020):

1. Provide effective life safety measures and reduce property losses

2. Provide for the rapid resumption of impacted businesses and community services

3. Provide accurate documentation and records required for cost recovery efforts Corona Fire Prevention Guidelines and Standards
The CFD prepares, adopts, and maintains fire prevention standards that apply to existing and proposed buildings, landscapes, and property. Many of these standards are the same requirements of the California Fire Code, with certain local standards being more restrictive than the state codes by adoption of local amendments to the Corona Municipal Code. Fire prevention standards include but are not limited to the following:
• Construction standards
• Guideline for Fire Flow And Hydrant Spacing
• Automatic Fire Sprinkler Plan review and inspection
• Hazardous material use and storage
• Fuel modification requirements
Corona Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
The City of Corona is conducting a 5-year update to the 2017 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) and has completed the Draft 2023 LHMP. The 2023 Draft LHMP identifies the City’s hazards, reviews and assesses past disaster occurrences, estimates the probability of future occurrences, and sets goals to mitigate potential risks to reduce or eliminate long-term risks to people and property from natural and human-made hazards. Of the 23 hazards evaluated from the 2017 LHMP, no additional hazards were identified. Wildfire hazard is still rated as the second highest risk. Due to the increase in occurrence or severity of some of these hazards, emphasis on mitigation priority is greater than in previous years. As such, the goals and mitigation programs have been revised and are provided in the hazard mitigation plan to address each of the hazards (City of Corona 2023).

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

WILDFIRE

ENPLANNERS

4.20-7

4.20.5 PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES
PDF FIRE-1: Fire Protection Plan (FPP) - The proposed BPI development includes the following project design features (PDFs) defined in the FPP:
• A wildland fire hazard rating assessment and calculations of the expected fire behavior in the event a wildland fire should occur within the off-site native vegetation. • A long-term perimeter vegetative fuel modification treatment and maintenance plan to minimize any loss to residential structures within the planned development due to wildland fire.
• Additional construction features, where required, due to high fire hazard wildland fuels. • Landscaping criteria deployed around all planned structures. • Building construction and design criteria.
• A review of ignition resistant building features; community protection systems (e.g. water and access); and specifications to assure these plans, features and systems adequately protect life and property.

PDF FIRE-2: Fuel Modification Zones (FMZ) - The proposed BPI development includes the following PDFs defined the FMZ:
• Irrigated Zone 1 (0-50 feet from buildings), a defensible space zone, requires complete clearance of combustible materials and most vegetation. It provides a fire break and allows firefighters safe access during wildfires. This zone encompasses level or graded areas around buildings, primarily used for parking. • Thinning Zone 2 (50-100 feet from buildings) focuses on fuel reduction. Half (50%) of the above-ground vegetation must be removed, prioritizing fire-prone species listed in the FPP. To prevent erosion, root systems should be left intact. This zone allows for limited landscaping with fire-resistant native plants and ornamental plants (up to 4 feet tall) and strategically limbed trees (branches removed at least 6 feet from the ground). • Roadside Fuel Treatment zones (within 30 feet of roads) prioritizes safe evacuation and emergency access during wildfires. All combustible vegetation must be cleared for a minimum of 30 feet on each side of roadways. This area can be landscaped with lowmaintenance, fire-resistant plants similar to Zone 1. Sidewalks and other noncombustible features can be added for further protection. • Manufactured Slopes in Common Areas zones are slopes, whether temporarily or permanently irrigated, to be planted with fire-resistant vegetation. The owner or manager is responsible for maintaining these slopes to meet Zone 2 fuel modification criteria in the long term.
• Open Space - to be maintained by the Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority upon acquisition.
• Zone Markers - All exterior boundaries on the east side of the proposed BPI development with Zone 2 abutting wildland fuels shall be permanently marked on the

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

WILDFIRE

ENPLANNERS

4.20-8
ground where it transitions for the purpose of guiding annual fuel treatment maintenance and inspection operations. The most reliable markers are steel fence posts with a baked on painted finish. The upper half of the above ground portion of the fence post shall be painted a bright “day glow” orange to improve visibility. These Fuel Modification Zone markers must be spaced so that the markers on each side of an installed marker can be seen from that marker.

4.20.6 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Based on the relevant CEQA Guidelines as currently implemented by the City, if located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as a Very High FHSZs, a significant impact related to wildfire would occur if the project would:

Threshold FIRE-1 Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Threshold FIRE-2 Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? Threshold FIRE-3 Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary ongoing impacts to the environment?
Threshold FIRE-4 Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?

METHODOLOGY
The following analysis is based, in part, on information provided by the Fire Protection Plan prepared for the Proposed Project (Appendix X), City of Corona General Plan, Corona Emergency Operation Plan (EOP), Corona Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP), CAL FIRE, and the City of Corona Fire Department Fire Strategic Plan (FSP). The information obtained from these sources and other relevant materials was reviewed to evaluate the potential presence of wildfire risks on the Project site.

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

WILDFIRE

ENPLANNERS

4.20-9

4.20.7 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH MODIFIED

PROJECT
Impacts Would the
Modified
Project
result in new
or more
severe
impacts
requiring
revisions to
the Prior
EIR?
Would the
Modified Project
be implemented
under changed
circumstances
resulting in new or
more severe
impacts requiring
revisions to the
Prior EIR?
Is there new
information that
would result in
new or more
severe impacts
from the
Modified
Project
requiring
revisions to the
Prior EIR?
Would the
Modified
Project result in
eliminated,
reduced, or no
changes to
impacts and no
changes to the
Prior EIR are
required?
If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, a significant impact related to wildfire would occur if the project would; FIRE-1 Substantially impair an
adopted emergency
response plan or
emergency evacuation
plan?
FIRE-2 Due to slope,
prevailing winds, and
other factors,
exacerbate wildfire
risks, and thereby
expose project
occupants to pollutant
concentrations from a
wildfire or the
uncontrolled spread of
a wildfire?
FIRE-3 Require the installation
or maintenance of
associated
infrastructure (such as
roads, fuel breaks,
emergency water
sources, power lines or
other utilities) that may
exacerbate fire risk or
that may result in
temporary ongoing
impacts to the
environment?

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

WILDFIRE

ENPLANNERS

4.20-10
Impacts Would the
Modified
Project
result in new
or more
severe
impacts
requiring
revisions to
the Prior
EIR?
Would the
Modified Project
be implemented
under changed
circumstances
resulting in new or
more severe
impacts requiring
revisions to the
Prior EIR?
Is there new
information that
would result in
new or more
severe impacts
from the
Modified
Project
requiring
revisions to the
Prior EIR?
Would the
Modified
Project result in
eliminated,
reduced, or no
changes to
impacts and no
changes to the
Prior EIR are
required?
If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, a significant impact related to wildfire would occur if the project would; FIRE-4 Expose people or
structures to significant
risks, including
downslope or
downstream flooding
or landslides, as a
result of runoff, postfire slope instability, or
drainage changes?

IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE MODIFIED PROJECT
Impact FIRE-1: Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Eliminated, Reduced, or No Changes to Impacts and No Changes to the Prior EIR are Required.

As previously stated, the City has prepared an EOP to ensure the most effective allocation of resources for the maximum benefit and protection of the civilian population in time of emergency. In addition, the City’s LHMP is designed to identify local hazards and provide mitigation measures to address these hazards. Although the proposed GRRSP Amendment includes adjustments to land use dedication and acreages, implementation of the Modified Project would not result in substantial changes to the circulation patterns or emergency access routes as previously analyzed in the 2001 EIR or as envisioned in the current EOP. As previously identified, the Project site is within the response area of Corona Fire Department, Fire Station 5, within a Local Responsibility Area designated as a Very High FHSZ.

Construction
Development of the Modified Project includes development of the proposed BPI development and off-site utilities and roadway improvements. Construction of the BPI development in PA’s 1, 2, and 3 includes five (5) light industrial buildings totaling 746,330 square feet. The off-site

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

WILDFIRE

ENPLANNERS

4.20-11
improvements to roadways and utilities would occur in public rights-of-way and along the Project frontage. During construction activities, temporary full or partial lane closures may be necessary, especially for Green River Road widening and utility and roadway improvements at the Palisades Drive and Green River Road connection. The full or partial lane closures could result in the redistribution of traffic along adjacent and surrounding roadways. As construction progresses, access for emergency vehicles could be impaired as result of reduced roadway widths (or capacity) and increased volumes of construction-related traffic or redistributed traffic. As a result, construction could impair or physically interfere with adopted Emergency Response Plans or Emergency Evacuation Plans.

As previously stated, the City has several policies regarding public safety related to emergencies, including those found in the General Plan Safety Element, the EOP and the LHMP. The Modified Project would be required to comply with all of these policies. In addition, current construction best practices as implemented by MM HAZ-1 in Section 4.9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, would require the preparation and implementation of a Construction Traffic Control Plan that would allow for access for emergency vehicles to be maintained at all times. Furthermore, the plan would require that police, fire, and emergency services be notified of the timing, location, and duration of construction activities that could hinder or delay emergency access through the construction period. As a result, compliance of City plans, policies, and incorporation of Mitigation Measure MM HAZ-1, constructionrelated impacts would be reduced to less than significant in a similar manner as identified in the 2001 EIR for the Approved Project.

Operation
Once constructed, the proposed circulation improvements around and within the Project site would provide additional access for potential movement of emergency equipment.

Improvements such as widening of Green River Road and provision of emergency access locations would improve the ability of emergency personnel to access the site while the interior roadways constructed to CFD fire apparatus access standards would improve their ability to navigate within the site. In addition, these improvements would also aid in the evacuation of Project residents within the Estate Residential uses as well as adjacent residences. Due to the circulatory improvements associated with the Project, it can be determined that implementation of the Modified Project would improve emergency access to the Project site and nearby uses and would not impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.

Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required in a similar manner as identified in the 2001 EIR for the Approved Project.

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

WILDFIRE

ENPLANNERS

4.20-12
Impact FIRE-2: Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
Eliminated, Reduced, or No Changes to Impacts and No Changes to the Prior EIR are Required.

A wildfire will generally spread uphill due to preheating of the fuel and up-slope draft unless the prevailing wind is strong enough to overcome these two forces. The flames are closer to the fuel on the uphill side and they receive more radiant heat. This results in more preheating and faster igniting of the fuel. The heated air rises along the slope increasing the draft that further increases the rate of spread. As a result of winds blowing up-slope, more convective heat also reaches the fuel in front of the fire, and it is pre-heated more quickly to the ignition temperature. The opposite is true at night. When the slope becomes shaded, the surface generally loses heat rapidly and becomes cool. The air adjacent to the surface also cools and becomes denser thus heavier and it can begin to flow down-slope.

Historically, wildfires have occasionally burned into the City from the Cleveland National Forest often pushed by moderate west to southwest winds. Because a portion of the Modified Project site is located on the hillside of the Santa Ana Mountains impacted by these winds, and more importantly being located within a Very High FHSZ, the risk for the Modified Project site to exacerbate wildfire spreading is a potentially significant impact.

As identified in the 2001 EIR, future development resulting from the GRRSP would be required to prepare a Fuel Modification Program to be approved by the City prior to grading activities. As included in detail above in PDF FIRE-1, the FPP (Appendix X) addresses issues related to wildfire potential in the vicinity of the development of the BPI development in relation to the type of construction material and design, and landscaping and vegetation that would be allowed within the BPI Project area (GRRSP PAs 1, 2, and 3). Moreover, the purpose of the FPP is to implement Fuel Modification Zones (PDF FIRE-2) to ensure all proposed structures are safe from future wildland fires to the maximum extent feasible, as shown in Figure 4.20-1.

Overall, the Modified Project, would be constructed in compliance with the CFC and CBC, along with being compliant with CFD requirements as reflected in the Project’s FPP including the Fuel Modification Program. Additionally, with the implementation of standard conditions of approval PDF FIRE-1 and -2, the Project occupants would not be exposed to pollutant concentrations from wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire by exacerbating wildfire risks. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required in a similar manner as identified in the 2001 EIR for the Approved Project.

PAGE: 4.20-13
FIGURE 4.20-1: FUEL MODIFICATION ZONES
SOURCE: KWC ENGINEERS, 2023.

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

WILDFIRE

ENPLANNERS

4.20-14
This Page Intentionally Left Blank

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

WILDFIRE

ENPLANNERS

4.20-15
Impact FIRE-3: Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary ongoing impacts to the environment?
Eliminated, Reduced, or No Changes to Impacts and No Changes to the Prior EIR are Required.

As previously discussed in Threshold FIRE-2, the Modified Project site is in a Very High FHSZ and as a standard condition of approval for the Approved Project, future development would be required to prepare a Fuel Modification Program to be approved by the City prior to grading activities. As part of the development of the BPI Project design, improvements outlined in the FPP and Fuel Modification Program (PDF FIRE-1) would be approved by the City to reduce fire risk to the maximum extent feasible. In addition, the BPI development would incorporate the four main FMZs (PDF FIRE-2) as identified in the FMP, previously shown in Figure 4.20-1, which include the augmentation and long-term maintenance of surrounding vegetation to reduce risks from wildfires to life and property to the maximum extent feasible. The FPP also requires Zone Markers, bright orange markers on steel fence posts to clearly mark the boundary between Zone 2 and wildland areas for easier maintenance and inspection. Furthermore, the FPP identifies the Modified Project’s Open space areas within the Project area to be managed the Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority upon acquisition.

As a result, with implementation of the FPP and FMP as outlined in PDF FIRE-1 and -2, the proposed BPI development and balance of the Modified Project would not exacerbate fire risk or result in temporary ongoing impacts to the environment. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required in a similar manner as identified in the 2001 EIR for the Approved Project.

Impact FIRE-4: Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? Eliminated, Reduced, or No Changes to Impacts and No Changes to the Prior EIR are Required.

Vegetation is crucial in maintaining existing drainage patterns and the stability of soils on slopes and hillsides. Leaves, stems and branches capture and slow drainage, allowing it to more effectively percolate into the soil. Removal of surface vegetation reduces the ability of the soil surface to absorb rainwater and can allow for increased runoff that may include large amounts of debris or mud-flows. This risk is especially high under post-fire conditions as the rate of

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

WILDFIRE

ENPLANNERS

4.20-16
surface water runoff is increased as water percolation into the soil is reduced. This risk is especially high after wildfires, where fire-altered soil may repel water (become hydrophobic) and further reduce absorption. As shown in Figure 4.20-2, Wildfire History, since 1900 approximately one (1) to eight (8) fires have burned onto the Project site. The majority of the historic fires have burned on the undeveloped hillsides of the Santa Ana Mountains.

The Modified Project would be developed at the base of and on the hillsides of the Santa Ana Mountains. Under existing conditions, if a fire were to occur in the area, vegetation that stabilizes soils on the Project site could be burned and lead to increased erosion. As part of the Modified Project, a FPP would be drafted and approved by the City and CFD as required.

Moreover, as included as PDF FIRE-1, the BPI development would implement the FPP requirements including the installation of FMZs (PDF FIRE-2) that incorporate defensible space zones to reduce wildfire impacts and improve erosion control on slopes. In the unlikely event of a fire, the BPI development construction materials and design, landscaping and vegetation area would lower rates of erosion and siltation of the slopes compared to pre-project conditions.

Once developed, the BPI development would be graded to a flat surface with manufactured slopes. As discussed previously in Section 4.6 Geology and Soils, although the Project area is susceptible to earthquake induced landslides, no history of landslides were identified as part of the site-specific geotechnical analysis. While vegetation thinning associated with the FMZ would reduce some of the vegetation in the sloped area south of the BPI Project, not all vegetation would be removed. This will allow root systems to remain and stabilize the slope.

A fire burning through the area of thinned vegetation would burn at a lower intensity due to the reduced fuels available. This would result in a higher likelihood that root systems survive and continue to provide slope stabilization after the fire event. A fire burning through untreated fuels would burn at a higher intensity and possibly result in no vegetative matter remaining which would increase erosion potential. With the specific fire protection features designed for the BPI Project such as the water supply system, fire sprinklers, ignition resistant construction, fire access, and FMZ, it is unlikely that a fire would spread from the Project site to this vegetated area.

Soils on the Project would be stabilized during construction, including installation of infrastructure for diverting stormwater, and would include thinning of vegetation fuels on the most prominent slope which would reduce fire intensity, giving existing plants the best chance to survive and continue to provide slope stabilization. Due to those factors, the Project would not expose people or structures to downslope or downstream flooding or landslides as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

PAGE: 4.20-17
FIGURE 4.20-2: WILDFIRE HISTORY
SOURCE: CITY OF CORONA, 2020.

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

WILDFIRE

ENPLANNERS

4.20-18
This Page Intentionally Left Blank

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

WILDFIRE

ENPLANNERS

4.20-19

4.20.8 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE MODIFIED

PROJECT
Less than Significant Impact. The Project will have a less than significant impact directly or indirectly to an emergency response or evacuation plan and mitigation is not required. The nearest Fire Station is less than a mile from the Project site and would adequately provide emergency services during construction and once in operation. As discussed in Threshold A (i), Section 3.2.4, Public Services, the Project’s incremental impacts on fire protection services would be less than significant due to the proposed Project’s approximate population increase of less than one-tenth of one percent of the City’s current population. The Project includes design features, such as a Fire Protection Plan and Fuel Modification Plan conditionally approved by the City and CFD. Those design features minimize the Project’s potential to exacerbate fire danger within the surrounding area, as well as post-fire flooding or landslides.

Although the surrounding area to the north and west is generally built out and was developed under different provisions of the CFC, CBC, and CFD all future cumulative projects within the Project area including nearby properties located in the VHFHSZ would be required to adhere to current provisions of the CFC, CBC and CFD to reduce impacts from wildfire. With implementation of the Project’s design features PDF FIRE-1 and -2 in combination with cumulative project compliance with the CFC, CBC, and CFD requirements, the Project would have a less than significant cumulative wildfire impact.

4.20.9 MITIGATION MEASURES IDENTIFIED IN PRIOR EIR APPLICABLE TO

MODIFIED PROJECT
No mitigation measures related to wildfire were included in the 2001 EIR.

4.20.10 NEW MITIGATION MEASURES APPLICABLE TO MODIFIED PROJECT No new mitigation measures related to wildfire are required.

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

WILDFIRE

ENPLANNERS

4.20-20
This Page Intentionally Left Blank

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-1

5.0 RELOCATION OF PCL-1 PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL

IMPACT ANALYSIS

5.0.1 APPROACH TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS OF THE PROPOSED RELOCATION OF PCL-1
As detailed in Section 3.1.2 and 3.3, the proposed Relocation of Proposed Constrained Linkage 1 (PCL-1) requires the City to prepare environmental analysis and approval of the relocation based on superiority of the proposed alignment in comparison to the alignment of existing PCL-1 for use by the Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority (RCA) to make this change to the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (WR-MSHCP). The City is preparing this SEIR as lead agency to be used by RCA, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and California Department of Fish and Wildlife to approve the relocation in their role as Responsible and Trustee agencies. The existing and proposed locations for PCL-1 are shown in previously referenced Figure 3-3.

This section of the Draft EIR is based on the Criteria Refinement Analysis Relocation of Proposed Constrained Linkage 1, prepared by Glenn Lukos Associates, Inc. dated December 12, 2023 (Appendix Q).

With this in mind, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) provides that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) focus on a project’s significant effects on the environment, discussing the effects with emphasis in proportion to their severity and probability of occurrence.

The City has determined that the proposed Relocation of PCL-1 Project has the potential to result in new and/or substantially more severe significant environmental impacts. For the purposes of Section 5.0, references to the “proposed Project” or “Project” are defined as the proposed Relocation of PCL-1. Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines, this section addresses impacts associated with the proposed Project based on analysis of the following environmental resource topics:

5.1 Aesthetics 5.2 Land Use and Planning

5.3 Agricultural & Forest Resources 5.4 Minerals

5.5 Air Quality 5.6 Noise

5.7 Biological Resources 5.8 Population and Housing

5.9 Cultural Resources 5.10 Public Services

5.11 Energy 5.12 Recreation

5.13 Geology / Soils 5.14 Transportation

5.15 Greenhouse Gas Emissions 5.16 Tribal Cultural Resources

5.17 Hazards & Hazardous Materials 5.18 Utilities / Service Systems

5.19 Hydrology / Water Quality 5.20 Wildfire

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-2

5.0.2 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
The analysis relative to each environmental issue will include the following:
• A description of the existing setting relative to each environmental issue; • A summary of policies and regulations relevant to the specific environmental issue; • The identification of the significance thresholds against which the project’s impact will be measured;
• An evaluation of project-specific impacts and a determination of significance based on identified threshold;
• A description of proposed project design features and/or standard conditions that will help reduce the level of any potential impact;
• An identification of feasible measures to minimize any significant environmental effect; • A determination of the level of significance after mitigation measures are implemented; and
• An evaluation of cumulative impacts and determination of significance.

Mitigation Measures are the requirements imposed on the proposed Project to reduce the significance of identified impacts. Mitigation Measures have been identified for those significant impacts. Mitigation Measures will be required during implementation of the proposed Project.

The environmental analysis provided hereafter in Sections 5.1 through 5.20 focuses on changes in the existing physical environment and identifies the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts associated with the development of the proposed Project.

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-3

5.1 AESTHETICS

5.1.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The proposed Project’s alignment, approximately 711.28 acres, is outside of the City’s limits but within the City’s Sphere of Influence (SOI) within Riverside County. The alignment runs south to north from the Cleveland National Forest to SR-91. The Relocation of PCL-1 is located on property known as B Canyon and is approximately 711.28 acres, and consists of the parcels that would be added to the WR-MSHCP as Additional Reserve Lands.

Elevations of the proposed Project range from approximately 525 feet AMSL at SR-91(west of Fresno Road) in the north to approximately 2,100 AMSL in the south. The northern portion of the Project is topographically oriented north to south along ridgelines and canyons, while the southern portion crosses a series of steep east-west canyons and ridgelines.

The proposed Project alignment is comprised of undeveloped lands with dirt access roads, and heavily vegetated with coastal sage scrub, chaparral, non-native grasslands, coast live oak woodland, and riparian forest, including access roads and canyon routes. The existing zoning for the proposed Project alignment overlays Residential Rural (R-R) (Riverside County) and Rural Mountainous (SOI) land uses.

The Project alignment is largely surrounded by undeveloped lands, however light emitting sources (i.e., street lighting, building illumination, security lighting, and landscape lighting) are from the northernly SR-91, residential uses to the east, and Star Ranch to west.

5.1.2 EXISTING REGULATIONS, PLANS, PROGRAMS, AND POLICIES Refer to the federal, State, regional, and local regulations previously referenced within Section

4.1.4 Aesthetics prepared for the Modified Project.

5.1.3 PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES (PDF)
The proposed Project does not include PDFs.

5.1.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Based on the relevant CEQA Guidelines as currently implemented by the City of Corona, significant visual quality impacts would occur if the proposed Project or any Project-related component would:

Threshold AES-1 Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Threshold AES-2 Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway?

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-4
Threshold AES-3 In nonurbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). In an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
Threshold AES-4 Create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect daytime or nighttime views in the area?

5.1.5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH PROPOSED PROJECT Impact AES-1: Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Impact AES-2: Substantially damage scenic resources, including, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? Impact AES-3: In nonurbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). In an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? Impact AES-4: Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
No Impact.

According to the WR-MSHCP, a Constrained Linkage is a constricted connection expected to provide for movement of identified Planning Species between Core Areas, where options for assembly of the connection are limited due to existing patterns of development and land use. As summarized in Section 3.0, Project Description, the WR-MSHCP designated a wildlife corridor named PCL-1 to provide a constrained connection between the wildlife habitats located in Core Area A to the north (Prado Basin/Santa Ana River) and Core Area B to the south (Cleveland National Forest). There have been discussions about relocating PCL-1 to alternative and superior yet still constrained locations for the past 20 years, including the most recent proposal in 2016 that wasn't approved due to various limitations. However, there is agreement among relevant authorities that a new alignment in B Canyon as envisioned by the proposed Relocation of PCL-1 would be more beneficial for wildlife movement.

Consequently, the proposed realignment would not result in and does not require any new development or any temporary construction activities. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any impacts to a scenic vista, scenic highway, nor would it degrade the existing visual character or create glare. No mitigation measures are required.

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-5

5.1.6 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Less Than Significant.

The cumulative aesthetics study area for the Project is the viewshed from public areas that can view the Project alignment and locations that can be viewed from the Project alignment. As previously determined, the proposed realignment does not require any new development or any temporary construction activities, therefore implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any impacts to a scenic vista, scenic highway, nor would it degrade the existing visual character or create glare. In addition, there are no cumulative projects identified within the vicinity of proposed Project as identified in Section 2.0 that would contribute to development that is consistent with planned uses in the Project area. The Project would result in no impact associated with scenic vistas, scenic resources, visual character, and lighting. Consequently, the proposed Project would result in no impacts associated with aesthetics and no mitigation is required.

5.1.7 SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES
No Mitigation Measures are required.

5.1.8 SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
No significant environmental impacts occur with the proposed Project.

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-6

5.2 AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTRY RESOURCES

5.2.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The proposed Project’s alignment, approximately 701.04 acres, is outside of the City’s limits but within the City’s SOI within Riverside County. The alignment runs north to south from the Cleveland National Forest to SR-91. The Relocation of PCL-1 is located on property known as B Canyon and is approximately 711.28 acres, and consists of the parcels that would be added to the WR-MSHCP as Additional Reserve Lands.

Elevations of the proposed Project range from approximately 525 feet AMSL at SR-91(west of Fresno Road) in the north to approximately 2,100 AMSL in the south. The northern portion of the Project is topographically oriented north to south along ridgelines and canyons, while the southern portion crosses a series of steep east-west canyons and ridgelines.

The proposed Project alignment is comprised of undeveloped lands with dirt access roads, and heavily vegetated with coastal sage scrub, chaparral, non-native grasslands, coast live oak woodland, and riparian forest, including access roads and canyon routes. The existing zoning for the proposed Project alignment overlays Residential Rural (R-R) (Riverside County) and Rural Mountainous (SOI) land uses.

The current Farmland Monitoring and Mapping Program (FMMP) map identifies the Project site, which consists of the approximately 711.28-acre Project alignment as having the following designations:
• Grazing Land: Existing vegetation is suited to the grazing of livestock. • Other Land: land not included in any other mapping category. Examples include low density rural developments.

The Project site does not contain any land defined as prime or farmland of statewide importance, forest land (as defined by Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or land zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g)).

5.2.2 EXISTING REGULATIONS, PLANS, PROGRAMS, AND POLICIES Refer to the federal, State, regional, and local regulations previously referenced within Section

4.2.4 Agricultural and Forestry Resources prepared for the Modified Project.

5.2.3 PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES (PDF)
The proposed Project does not include PDFs.

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-7

5.2.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Based on the relevant CEQA Guidelines as currently implemented by the City, significant agricultural and forest resources impacts would occur if the proposed Project or any Project-related component would:

Threshold AGF-1 Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
Threshold AGF-2 Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract?
Threshold AGF-3 Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? Threshold AGF-4 Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
Threshold AGF-5 Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to nonagricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?

5.2.5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH PROPOSED PROJECT Impact AG-1: Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
No Impact.

As previously stated, the proposed Project would relocate the PCL-1 alignment to improve connectivity between designated wildlife habitats within the WR-MSHCP. It can be anticipated that all of the realignment would be used for wildlife movement and not to support existing farmland, Prime Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. In addition, the proposed realignment does not require any new development or any temporary construction activities that would otherwise impact farmland.

According to the current FMMP map, the approximately 711.28-acre Project alignment consists of Grazing Land and Other Land designations. Consequently, there are no Prime and Unique Farmland within the Project alignment. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland),

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-8
to non-agricultural use. As a result, no impact would occur, and no mitigation measures are required.

Impact AG-2: Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract?
No Impact.

As stated in the City’s General Plan EIR, there are no Williamson Act contracts in the City.

Therefore, no conflicts with Williamson Act contract lands would occur. As a result, no impacts would occur, and no mitigation measures are required.

Impact AG-3: Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))?
Impact AG-4: Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to nonforest use? Impact AG-5: Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to nonagricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? No Impact.

As stated in the Criteria Refinement Analysis (Appendix Q), the Project alignment is heavily vegetated with coastal sage scrub, chaparral, non-native grasslands, coast live oak woodland, and riparian forest located within the Santa Ana Mountains of the Cleveland National Forest.

According to CALFIRE, there are no current or planned fixed commercial timber operations subject to a Timber Harvesting Plan in southwest Riverside County. As stated in the City’s General Plan EIR, there are no timber production or agricultural zones in the City or its SOI. Moreover, the proposed Project does not require any new development or any temporary construction activities, nor would the Project include any new the land use designations. Consequently, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in loss or conversion of timberland to non-forest uses, or the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. In addition, the implementation of the proposed Project will not result in the conversion of any land to municipal or agricultural uses. As such, there would be no changes in the existing environment which could result in the conversion of farmland or forest land to non‐agricultural or non‐forest use. As a result, no impacts would occur, and no mitigation measures are required.

5.2.6 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Agricultural Resources

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-9
The cumulative study area for agricultural resources is the City and the County of Riverside as these resources are regularly assessed on the countywide level as part of the state’s FMMP.

Throughout the County, numerous development projects exist that would result in the additional conversion of agricultural land, including Prime Farmland and Farmland of Statewide Importance, to nonagricultural uses. There are no agricultural uses, Williamson Act contracts, or agricultural zones within the immediate vicinity of the Project alignment and within the peripheries of the City.

As previously discussed, implementation of the proposed Project would not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), to non-agricultural use. Therefore, the Project would not cumulatively contribute to agricultural resource impacts.

Thus, cumulative impacts related to agricultural resources would not occur.

Forest Resources
The cumulative study area for forestry resources is the City and the County of Riverside. There are no forest resources or woodland vegetation within the immediate vicinity of the Project site and limited lowland woodlands within the peripheries of the City. As discussed above, Project implementation would not directly impact forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production. Therefore, the Project would not cumulatively contribute to forest resource impacts.

5.2.7 SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES
No Mitigation Measures are required.

5.2.8 SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
No significant environmental impacts occur with the proposed Project.

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-10

5.3 AIR QUALITY

5.3.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
As previously discussed in Section 4.3.3 prepared for the Modified Project, the proposed Project alignment is within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB). Air quality in the basin is measured by comparing pollutant levels in air samples to set standards. The US EPA sets National Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for six key pollutants, while the California Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) are even stricter. Areas that fail to meet NAAQS must develop a plan to reduce emissions. The Project alignment is located within the Corona/Norco Area Source Receptor Areas (SRA) 22.

The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) uses significance thresholds to determine if a project's emissions would significantly worsen air quality. Projects that meet these thresholds and are consistent with the growth projections in the AQMP (Air Quality Management Plan) are considered compliant with air quality regulations. The AQMP outlines strategies to bring the region into attainment with air quality standards.

SCAQMD defines sensitive receptor locations as residential or other locations where sensitive populations may be located. Other sensitive receptor locations include schools, hospitals, convalescent homes, day care centers, and other locations where children, chronically ill individuals, or other sensitive persons could be exposed.

5.3.2 EXISTING REGULATIONS, PLANS, PROGRAMS, AND POLICIES Refer to the federal, State, regional, and local regulations previously referenced within Section

4.3.4 Air Quality prepared for the Modified Project.

5.3.3 PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES (PDF)
The proposed Project does not include PDFs.

5.3.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Based on the relevant CEQA Guidelines as currently implemented by the City of Corona, significant air quality impacts would occur if the proposed Project or any Project-related component would:

Threshold AQ-1 Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Threshold AQ-2 Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
Threshold AQ-3 Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-11
Threshold AQ-4 Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?

5.3.5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH PROPOSED PROJECT Impact AQ-1: Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
Impact AQ-2: Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? Impact AQ-3: Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Impact AQ-4: Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
No Impact.

Land use development projects must conform with the AQMP and other regulations under the SCAQMD. As previously stated, the proposed Project would relocate the PCL-1 alignment to improve connectivity between designated wildlife habitats within the WR-MSHCP and no new development is proposed. Consequently, no construction or operational emissions would occur.

Therefore, the proposed Project would not obstruct implementation of any air quality plan, nor result in any increase of a criteria pollutant, expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations, or result in other emissions. As a result, no impacts would occur, and no mitigation measures are required.

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
No Impact.

The SCAQMD 2022 AQMP evaluates regional conditions within the Basin and sets regional emission significance thresholds for both construction and operation of development projects that apply to project-specific impacts and cumulatively-considerable impacts. Therefore, per SCAQMD’s methodology, if an individual project would result in air emissions of criteria pollutants that exceeds the SCAQMD’s thresholds for project-specific impacts, then it would also result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of these criteria pollutants.

As described above, no new development is proposed by the Project, therefore no construction or operational emissions will occur. Construction and operational emissions would not be generated by the Project and therefore impacts would not be cumulatively considerable.

In addition, the Project would not result in human health or cancer risk to adjacent land uses because no construction or operational emissions would be generated. Therefore, impacts on human health risks would not be cumulatively considerable.

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-12
Furthermore, the Project would not expose surrounding uses to objectionable odors. Thus, there is no potential for odors from the Project to combine with odors from surrounding development Projects and expose nearby sensitive receptors to offensive odors. Therefore, the Project would not result in significant cumulative impacts related to odors.

5.3.6 SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES
No Mitigation Measures are required.

5.3.7 SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
No significant environmental impacts occur with the proposed Project.

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-13

5.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
In accordance with the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP), a Criteria Refinement Analysis (CRA) was prepared by Glenn Lukos Associates dated December 12, 2023 (Appendix Q) to address the proposed relocation the alignment of Proposed Constrained Linkage 1 (PCL-1) to an alternate location. Due to several constraints associated with the existing alignment of PCL-1, the conceptual relocation of the linkage has been discussed multiple times over the past 15 years including most recently a prior analysis in 2016. Although a Criteria Refinement was not approved in 2016, the underlying need for the refinement has been generally acknowledged by the City, Regional Conservation Authority (RCA), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW).

5.4.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The MSHCP identifies seven Criteria Cells (1702, 1704, 1811, 1812, 1896, and 1898) within the Temescal Area Plan (Subunit 1 – Santa Ana River to Santa Ana Mountains) where conservation lands are described for the assembly of PCL-1. The current PCL-1 alignment is located within the northwestern portion of Riverside County near the San Bernardino and Orange County lines, south of State Route 91 (SR-91) in the northwest portion of the MSHCP Plan Area. PCL-1 is intended to connect Existing Core A (Prado Basin/Santa Ana River) with Existing Core B (Cleveland National Forest) to the south. Existing urban development constrains the linkage at its northern terminus, including State Route (SR) 91, the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) railroad line and Green River Road, although the linkage is unconstrained in the south. Despite these constraints, the MSHCP recognizes that PCL-1 likely provides for movement of mountain lion (Puma concolor) and bobcat (Lynx rufus) from the Santa Ana Mountains to the Chino Hills area beyond the Plan Area. Maintenance of contiguous habitat blocks with appropriate refugia for resting, such as rockpiles, brush piles, windfalls, hollow snags and hollow trees, is important for dispersal of juveniles in this proposed linkage. Additional PCL-1 planning species include the coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica) and Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperi).

As described above, a number of existing land uses constrain PCL-1 at its northern terminus including SR-91, the BNSF railroad line and Green River Road. Prior biological studies have identified and evaluated an alternative and less constrained linkage area west of the existing PCL1 alignment that is not currently identified for conservation by the MSHCP. Analysis of the effectiveness of the existing PCL-1 compared to the effectiveness of the alternative PCL-1 in meeting the stated MSHCP goals for PCL-1 was studied, including the potential to connect with the Prado Basin and the Chino Hills. In addition, a wildlife movement study was performed in 2006 and 2007 for the property that contains existing PCL-1 and alternate PCL-1, referred to at that time as the “Corona 850” property.

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-14
The proposed Criteria Refinement presents the alternate alignment for PCL-1, which will include existing MSHCP Conserved Lands and lands that have been acquired by the RCA. A total of 711.28 acres of land will be assembled for the alternate PCL-1, consisting of ten parcels. The alternate PCL-1 alignment is located immediately west of the existing PCL-1 alignment. The existing alignment begins at the boundary with Core B (Cleveland National Forest) and extends north across undeveloped land, Green River Road, and SR-91, terminating just north of SR- 91.

The alternate alignment would also begin at the boundary with Core B and extend across undeveloped land before terminating at SR-91. Approximately 538.45 acres of the 711.28-acre total will be associated with the six Criteria Cells, with approximately 163.95 acres associated lands located outside of, but adjacent to, the Criteria Area.

The existing PCL-1 aligned and the proposed realignment of PCL-1 is shown on previously referenced Figure 3-3.

The alternate PCL-1 alignment is superior to the existing PCL-1 alignment in achieving connection with the Chino Hills because it is: not impacted by the high volume of traffic on Green River Road; it quickly crosses SR-91 rather than running alongside the freeway and ramps for as much as 1,200 feet; wildlife would negotiate the BNSF railroad line a half-mile away from SR-91 instead of negotiating both obstacles simultaneously; wildlife could use the existing footbridge across the Santa Ana River; and it leads to Aliso Canyon, which is the largest canyon in Chino Hills State Park, and therefore is a natural travel corridor for mountain lions, bobcats, and other wildlife.

Vegetation was analyzed within the existing PCL-1 and the alternate PCL-1. Table 5.4-1 provides a summary of the vegetation communities and is provided on Figure 5.1 PCL Vegetation Map.

Table 5.4-1 Vegetation Communities within the Existing PCL-1 and Alternate PCL-1 Vegetation Community Existing PCL-1
(Acres)
Alternate PCL-1
(Acres)
Residential/Urban/Exotic 16.67 21.21
Coastal Sage Scrub 5.51 55.09
Chaparral 250.68 546.16
Non-Native Grassland 45.84 69.69
Coast Live Oak Woodland 9.09 18.39
Miscellaneous Riparian 0.51 0.74
Total 328.30 711.28
Green River Road
Prado Road
91 LEGEND
FIGURE 5-1: PCL-1 VEGETATION MAP
SOURCE: GLENN LUKOS ASSOCIATES, 2024. PAGE: 5-15
Counties
Criteria Cell
Existing PCL-1 (Removed)
Existing PCL-1 (To Remain)
Alternate PCL-1 (New)
Chaparral
Coast Live Oak Woodland
Coastal Sage Scrub Grassland
Grassland
Miscellaneous Riparian
Residential/Urban/Exotic

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-16
This Page Intentionally Left Blank

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-17

5.4.2 EXISTING REGULATIONS, PLANS, PROGRAMS, AND POLICIES

FEDERAL
Federal Endangered Species Act
The Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) of 1973 defines an endangered species as “any species that is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range.” A threatened species is defined as “any species that is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range.” Under provisions of Section 9(a)(1)(B) of the FESA it is unlawful to “take” any listed species. “Take” is defined in Section 3(18) of FESA: “...harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct.” Further, the USFWS, through regulation, has interpreted the terms “harm” and “harass” to include certain types of habitat modification that result in injury to, or death of species as forms of “take.” These interpretations, however, are generally considered and applied on a case-by-case basis and often vary from species to species.

In a case where a property owner seeks permission from a federal agency for an action that could affect a federally listed plant and animal species, the property owner and agency are required to consult with USFWS. Section 9(a)(2)(b) of the FESA addresses the protections afforded to listed plants.

Section 7 of the ESA outlines the procedures for Federal interagency cooperation to conserve Federally listed species and designated critical habitat. Section 7 of the Act requires federal agencies to consult with the USFWS on proposed actions which may affect threatened or endangered species or which may affect critical habitat. Section 7 also requires federal agencies to confer with the USFWS if the agency determines that its action is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any proposed species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of proposed critical habitat. This consultation may take place in two steps:

1. Informal consultation is an optional process that includes all discussions, correspondence, etc. between the USFWS and the federal agency or a designated nonfederal representative. Informal consultation is designed to assist the involved agencies in determining whether an action may affect a listed species. If the USFWS concurs that an action is not likely to adversely affect a listed species, Section 7 consultation ends. During informal consultation, the USFWS may suggest modifications to the action that the federal agency and/or permittee could make to avoid the likelihood of adverse effect.

2. If the project is likely to adversely affect a listed species, formal consultation between the USFWS and the federal agency is initiated. During formal consultation, the USFWS evaluates information relating to potential project effects on the listed species.

At the conclusion of this evaluation, the USFWS formulates a Biological Opinion as to whether the project is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the listed species.

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-18
If a "jeopardy opinion" is issued, the USFWS is to include reasonable and prudent alternatives to the federal action. In the case of a "no jeopardy opinion" (or with the implementation of reasonable and prudent alternatives), the USFWS may also issue an "incidental take" statement, which allows the incidental take of a listed species in accordance with terms and conditions specified in the Biological Opinion.

Section 10 of the ESA provides the regulatory mechanism which allows the incidental take of a listed species by private interests and non-federal government agencies during lawful land, water, and ocean use activities. Under these conditions habitat conservation plans (HCPs) for the impacted species must be developed, approved by the USFWS, and implemented by the permittee.

It is the goal through the HCP to minimize impacts to the species and develop viable mitigation measures to offset the unavoidable impacts.

STATE
California Endangered Species Act
California’s Endangered Species Act (CESA) defines an endangered species as “a native species or subspecies of a bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, reptile, or plant which is in serious danger of becoming extinct throughout all, or a significant portion, of its range due to one or more causes, including loss of habitat, change in habitat, overexploitation, predation, competition, or disease.” The State defines a threatened species as “a native species or subspecies of a bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, reptile, or plant that, although not presently threatened with extinction, is likely to become an endangered species in the foreseeable future in the absence of the special protection and management efforts required by this chapter. Any animal determined by the commission as rare on or before January 1, 1985 is a threatened species.” Candidate species are defined as “a native species or subspecies of a bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, reptile, or plant that the commission has formally noticed as being under review by the department for addition to either the list of endangered species or the list of threatened species, or a species for which the commission has published a notice of proposed regulation to add the species to either list.” Candidate species may be afforded temporary protection as though they were already listed as threatened or endangered at the discretion of the Fish and Game Commission. Unlike the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA), CESA does not list invertebrate species.

Article 3, Sections 2080 through 2085, of the CESA addresses the taking of threatened, endangered, or candidate species by stating “No person shall import into this state, export out of 18 this state, or take, possess, purchase, or sell within this state, any species, or any part or product thereof, that the commission determines to be an endangered species or a threatened species, or attempt any of those acts, except as otherwise provided.” Under the CESA, “take” is defined as “hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill.” Exceptions authorized by the state to allow “take” require permits or memoranda of understanding and can be authorized for endangered species, threatened species, or candidate species for scientific,

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-19
educational, or management purposes and for take incidental to otherwise lawful activities.

Sections 1901 and 1913 of the of the California Fish and Game Code provide that notification is required prior to disturbance.

State authorizations of impacts to or incidental take of a listed species by a private individual or other private entity would be granted as outlined within Sections 2090-2097 of the CESA. This requires that the state lead agency consult with CDFW on projects with potential impacts on statelisted species. These provisions also require CDFW to coordinate consultations with USFWS for actions involving federally listed as 19 well as state-listed species. In certain circumstances, Section 2080.1 of the California Fish and Game Code allows CDFW to adopt the federal incidental take statement or the 10(a) permit as its own based on its findings that the federal permit adequately protects the species under state law.

Clean Water Act, Section 404
Pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA), the United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) regulates the discharge of dredged and/or fill material into waters of the United States. The term "waters of the United States" is defined in Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 328.3(a) as:
(1) All waters which are currently used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including all waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide;
(2) All interstate waters including interstate wetlands; (3) All other waters such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or natural ponds, the use, degradation or destruction of which could affect foreign commerce including any such waters:
(i) Which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes; or
(ii) From which fish or shell fish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce; or
(iii) Which are used or could be used for industrial purpose by industries in interstate commerce...
(4) All impoundments of waters otherwise defined as waters of the United States under the definition;
(5) Tributaries of waters identified in paragraphs (a) (1)-(4) of this section; (6) The territorial seas;

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-20
(7) Wetlands adjacent to waters (other than waters that are themselves wetlands) identified in paragraphs (a) (1)-(6) of this section.
(8) Waters of the United States do not include prior converted cropland. Notwithstanding the determination of an area's status as prior converted cropland by any other federal agency, for the purposes of the Clean Water Act, the final authority regarding Clean Water Act jurisdiction remains with the EPA.

Waste treatment systems, including treatment ponds or lagoons designed to meet the requirements of CWA (other than cooling ponds as defined in 40 CFR 123.11(m) which also meet the criteria of this definition) are not waters of the United States.

In the absence of wetlands, the limits of Corps jurisdiction in non-tidal waters, such as intermittent streams, extend to the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) which is defined at 33 CFR 328.3(e) as: ...that line on the shore established by the fluctuation of water and indicated by physical characteristics such as clear, natural line impressed on the bank, shelving, changes in the character of soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, the presence of litter and debris, or other appropriate means that consider the characteristics of the surrounding areas.

The term “wetlands” (a subset of “waters of the United States”) is defined at 33 CFR 328.3(b) as "those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support...a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions." In 1987 the Corps published the Wetland Manual to guide its field personnel in determining jurisdictional wetland boundaries. The methodology set forth in the Wetland Manual and the Arid West Supplement generally require that, in order to be considered a wetland, the vegetation, soils, and hydrology of an area exhibit at least minimal hydric characteristics. While the Wetland Manual and Arid West Supplement provide great detail in methodology and allow for varying special conditions, a wetland should normally meet each of the following three criteria:

More than 50 percent of the dominant plant species at the site must be hydrophytic in nature as published in the most current national wetland plant list; Soils must exhibit physical and/or chemical characteristics indicative of permanent or periodic saturation (e.g., a gleysol color, or mottles with a matrix of low chroma indicating a relatively consistent fluctuation between aerobic and anaerobic conditions); and Whereas the Wetland Manual requires that hydrologic characteristics indicate that the ground is saturated to within 12 inches of the surface for at least five percent of the growing season during a normal rainfall year, the Arid West Supplement does not include a quantitative criteria with the exception for areas with “problematic hydrophytic vegetation”, which require a minimum of 14 days of ponding to be considered a wetland.

Clean Water Act, Section 401

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-21
The California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) is responsible for the administration of Section 401 of the CWA. RWQCB and each of its nine Regional Boards regulate the discharge of waste (dredged or fill material) into waters of the United States and waters of the state. Waters of the United States are defined above in Section II.A and waters of the state are defined as “any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters, within the boundaries of the state” (California Water Code 13050[e]).

The Project is within the jurisdiction of the Santa Ana RWQCB and will require a water quality certification or waiver. Section 401 of the CWA requires certification for any federal permit or license authorizing impacts to waters of the U.S. (i.e., waters that are within federal jurisdiction), such as Section 404 of the CWA and Section 10 of the Safe Rivers and Harbors Act, to ensure that the impacts do not violate state water quality standards. When a project could impact waters outside of federal jurisdiction, the Regional Board has the authority under the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act to issue Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) to ensure that impacts do not violate state water quality standards. Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certifications, WDRs, and waivers of WDRs are also referred to as orders or permits.

California Fish and Wildlife Section 1600
Sections 1600-1603 of the California Fish and Game Code, the CDFW regulates all diversions, obstructions, or changes to the natural flow or bed, channel, or bank of any river, stream, or lake, which supports fish or wildlife.

CDFW defines a stream (including creeks and rivers) as "a body of water that flows at least periodically or intermittently through a bed or channel having banks and supports fish or other aquatic life. This includes watercourses having surface or subsurface flow that supports or has supported riparian vegetation." CDFW's definition of "lake" includes "natural lakes or manmade reservoirs." CDFW also defines a stream as “a body of water that flows, or has flowed, over a given course during the historic hydrologic regime, and where the width of its course can reasonably be identified by physical or biological indicators.” It is important to note that the Fish and Game Code defines fish and wildlife to include: all wild animals, birds, plants, fish, amphibians, invertebrates, reptiles, and related ecological communities including the habitat upon which they depend for continued viability (FGC Division 5, Chapter 1, section 45 and Division 2, Chapter 1 section 711.2(a) respectively). Furthermore, Division 2, Chapter 5, Article 6, Section 1600 et seq. of the California Fish and Game Code does not limit jurisdiction to areas defined by specific flow events, seasonal changes in water flow, or presence/absence of vegetation types or communities.

REGIONAL
Western Riverside Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-22
The MSHCP was adopted on June 17, 2003, and an Implementing Agreement (IA) was executed between the federal and state wildlife agencies and participating entities. The MSHCP is a comprehensive habitat conservation-planning program for western Riverside County. The intent of the MSHCP is to preserve native vegetation and meet the habitat needs of multiple species, rather than focusing preservation efforts on one species at a time. As such, the MSHCP is intended to streamline review of individual projects with respect to the species and habitats addressed in the MSHCP, and to provide for an overall Conservation Area that would be of greater benefit to biological resources than would result from a piecemeal regulatory approach. The MSHCP provides coverage (including take authorization for listed species) for special-status plant and animal species, as well as mitigation for impacts to sensitive species pursuant to Section 10(a) of the FESA.

Through agreements with the USFWS and the CDFW, the MSHCP designates 146 special-status animal and plant species that receive some level of coverage under the plan. Of the 146 “Covered Species” designated under the MSHCP, the majority of these species have no additional survey/conservation requirements. In addition, through project participation with the MSHCP, the MSHCP provides mitigation for project-specific impacts to Covered Species so that the impacts would be reduced to below a level of significance pursuant to CEQA. As noted above, projectspecific survey requirements exist for species designated as “Covered Species not yet adequately conserved”. These include Narrow Endemic Plant Species, as identified by the Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey Areas (NEPSSA); Criteria Area Plant Species identified by the Criteria Area Species Survey Areas (CASSA); animal species as identified by survey area; and plant and animal species associated with riparian/riverine areas and vernal pool habitats (Volume I, Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP document).

For projects that have a federal nexus such as through federal Clean Water Act Section 404 permitting, take authorization for federally listed covered species would occur under Section 7 (not Section 10) of FESA and that USFWS would provide a MSHCP consistency review of the proposed project, resulting in a biological opinion. The biological opinion would require no more compensation than what is required to be consistent with the MSHCP.

LOCAL
City of Corona 2020–2040 General Plan
The City of Corona 2020–2040 General Plan includes several goals and policies relating to biological resources including:

Environmental Resources Element
Goal ER-4 Proper management of floodplain and riparian areas for their importance to wildlife habitat, unique and sensitive plant life, water recharge, and public health and safety.

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-23
Policy ER-4.4 Preserve and enhance existing native riparian habitat and prevent obstruction of natural watercourses to the extent feasible in new private and public developments or implement on-site replacement as mitigation.

Goal ER-5 Preservation and protection of natural and man-made wetlands from development impacts for their importance to wildlife habitat, unique and sensitive plant life, water recharge, and scenic value.

Policy ER-5.5 Prohibit the planting of invasive, nonnative species in areas that would encroach and affect watercourses, their banks, and riparian areas.

Goal ER-6 Protection, enhancement, and sustaining of significant plant and wildlife species and habitat that exist in Corona and its Planning Area, for the long-term benefit of the natural environment and Corona residents and visitors.

Policy ER-6.1 Support the rehabilitation and enhancement of the biological diversity, and integrity of the City’s natural resources through such means as vegetation restoration, control of alien plants and animals, landscape buffering, and natural watercourse channel restoration.

Policy ER-6.2 Preserve the wildlife and plant species and habitats listed in Tables 4-12 and 4-13 of the Technical Background Report for the General Plan and EIR and those that may be considered by the City of Corona in the future.

Policy ER-6.3 Ensure that new developments and circulation improvements demonstrate compliance with state and federal regulations concerning the status, location, and condition of significant and sensitive biological species and habitats and riparian and riverine corridors.

Biological surveys, as required and defined by the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan, should identify potential impacts on biological resources and include mitigation measures to protect/replace resources in like kind.

Policy ER-6.4 Ensure that new developments through the development review process adhere to the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan, the Stephens’ Kangaroo Rat Habitat Conservation Plan, and other habitat plans as appropriate to conserve biological diversity through protection of natural communities.

Policy ER-6.5 Preserve wildlife habitat of significant natural open space areas, including expanding habitat ranges, movement corridors, and nesting sites by adhering to and implementing the core biological linkages identified in the MSHCP for parts of the Temescal Canyon Area Plan in the City. Any proposed recreational use of those areas such as trails shall be designed to not interfere with the preservation efforts established in the MSHCP.

Goal ER-7 Adequate protection of biological resources and increased public awareness of their value to the community.

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-24
Policy ER-7.1 Require that public and private construction activities be conducted in a manner to minimize adverse impacts on natural resources and biological resources in proximity to MSHCP conservation areas and adhere to the MSHCP Guidelines pertaining to Urban/Wildlife Interface for drainage, toxics, lighting, noise, invasive barriers and grading [MSHCP Section 6.1.4].

Goal ER-8 Protection, enhancement, and sustaining of significant plant and wildlife species and habitat that exist in Corona and its Planning Area, for the long-term benefit of the natural environment and Corona residents and visitors.

Policy ER-6.1 Support the rehabilitation and enhancement of the biological diversity, and integrity of the City’s natural resources through such means as vegetation restoration, control of alien plants and animals, landscape buffering, and natural watercourse channel restoration.

Goal ER-8 Protection of forest and vegetation resources in the City of Corona.

Policy ER-8.1 Cooperate with federal and state agencies to achieve the sustainable conservation of forest lands as a means of providing open space and protecting natural resources and MSHCP habitat.

Policy ER-8.4 Maintain and conserve superior examples of native trees (including oak trees), natural vegetation, stands of established trees, and other features for aesthetic and water conservation purposes.

Policy ER-8.5 Conserve the oak tree resources in the City to the extent feasible.

Goal ER-9 Protection of regional washes and waterways and their use for recreational and open space purposes such as trails, habitat preservation, and groundwater recharge.

Policy ER-9.1 Protect sensitive biological resources in the Temescal Canyon Area Plan through adherence to policies in the Western Riverside County MSHCP.

Policy ER-9.2 Conserve existing wetlands and wetland functions and values in the Temescal Canyon Wash, Prado Basin, and the Santa Ana River with a focus on conservation of existing riparian, woodland, coastal sage scrub, alluvial fan scrub, and open water habitats.

Policy ER-9.3 Conserve existing known populations of least Bell’s vireo and southwestern willow flycatcher within the Temescal Canyon Area Plan including locations at Prado Basin, Santa Ana River, and Temescal Wash. Maintain existing breeding habitat for these species at Prado Basin, Santa Ana River, and Temescal Wash where applicable to a particular project and location.

Policy ER-9.4 Conserve and manage suitable habitat for species known to exist in the Temescal Canyon Area Plan of Western Riverside County’s Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan.

Policy ER-9.5 Conserve clay soils supporting sensitive plant species known to occur in the Temescal Canyon area, including Munz’s onion, Palmer’s grappling hook, smallflower morning glory, long-spined spineflower, thread-leaved brodiaea, small-flowered microseris, and manystemmed dudleya.

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-25
Policy ER-9.6 Conserve sandy soils co-occurring with chaparral supporting Palomar monkeyflower, known to occur in the Temescal Canyon area.

Policy ER-9.7 Conserve locations supporting California muhly, heart-lived pitcher sage, Hall’s monardella, and other sensitive plant species that may occur in a wide variety of habitat types within the Temescal Canyon Area Plan.

Policy ER-9.8 Provide for and maintain connection(s) from the Cleveland National Forest to Prado Basin and the Santa Ana River within Temescal Canyon, providing opportunities for offsite connections to Chino Hills State Park.

Policy ER-9.10 Conserve floodplain areas supporting sensitive plant species known to occur in Temescal Canyon, including Parry’s spineflower, peninsular spineflower, and smooth tarplant, and Coulter’s matilija poppy.

Policy ER-9.11 Conserve rocky soils co-occurring with coastal sage scrub, peninsular jumper, or chaparral supporting Payson’s jewelflower, known to occur in the Temescal Canyon area.

Policy ER-9.12 Provide for and maintain a continuous linkage along Temescal Wash from the southern boundary of the Temescal Canyon area to the Santa Ana River.

5.4.3 PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES (PDF)
The proposed Project does not include PDFs.

5.4.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Based on the relevant CEQA Guidelines as currently implemented by the City of Corona, significant biological resource impacts would occur if the proposed Project or any Project-related component would:

Threshold BIO-1 Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or specialstatus species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Threshold BIO-2 Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Threshold BIO-3 Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-26
Threshold BIO-4 Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
Threshold BIO-5 Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Threshold BIO-6 Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan?

METHODOLOGY
The analysis within this section is based on the CRA (Appendix Q) completed for the Project, the MSCHP, the City’s 2020-2040 General Plan, and the City’s Municipal Code.

5.4.5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH PROPOSED PROJECT Impact BIO-1: Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Impact BIO-2: Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
No Impact. As part of the Criteria Refinement, a total of 378.44 acres of native vegetation will be included within the new limits of PCL-1. The alternate PCL-1 alignment would result in removal of

82.8 acres of described lands, specifically 11.5 acres of residential/urban/exotic, 2.0 acres of coastal sage scrub, 37.4 acres of chaparral, 30.3 acres of non-native grassland, 1.1 acres of coast live oak woodland, and 0.5 acres of riparian. alternate PCL-1 would conserve 465.8 acres of Undescribed Replacement Land, specifically, 16.0 acres of residential/urban/exotic (increase of 4.5 acres), 51.6 acres of coastal sage scrub (increase of 49.6 acres), 332.9 acres of chaparral (increase of 295.5 acres),

54.2 acres of non-native grasslands (increase of 23.9 acres), 10.4 acres of coast live oak woodland (increase of 9.3 acres), and 0.7 acres of riparian (increase of 0.2 acres).

The additional acreage of native vegetation communities includes coastal sage scrub, chaparral, non-native grasslands, coast live oak woodland, and miscellaneous riparian habitat. These habitats are identified as suitable habitat for special status species known in the area. Furthermore, proposed alternative alignment of PCL-1 would support nesting, foraging, and live-in habitat for

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-27
mountain lion, bobcat, Cooper’s hawk, and coastal gnatcatcher which are identified within Section

3.2.3 of the MSHCP.

In addition to the four MSHCP Planning Species identified above, with the increase of habitat and realignment of PCL-1, suitable habitat would potentially increase for other MSHCP Covered Species. These include Narrow Endemic Plant Species (MSHCP Volume I, Section 6.1.3), as identified by the NEPSSAs; Criteria Area Plant Species (MSHCP Volume I, Section 6.3.2) identified by the CAPSSAs; animals species (burrowing owl, mammals, amphibians) identified by survey areas (MSHCP Volume I, Section 6.3.2); and species associated with riparian/riverine areas and vernal pool habitats, i.e., least Bell’s vireo, southwestern willow flycatcher, western yellowbilled cuckoo, and designated fairy shrimp (MSHCP Volume I, Section 6.1.2).

Therefore, no impact would occur with the proposed Project, and no mitigation is required.

Impact BIO-3: Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
No Impact. With the alternative PCL-1 alignment, there will be no impacts to state or federally protected wetlands. In additional, the alternate PCL-1 would increase conserved land of these features. Therefore, no impact would occur with the proposed Project, and no mitigation is required.

Impact BIO-4: Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
No Impact. The alternate PCL-1 would provide connection to Prado Basin and the Chino Hills and exceed the minimum conservation goal for the combined independent Cells but would also exceed the high-range goal of the targeted conservation range. Furthermore, the alternative conservation configuration would shift conservation to the west and would still functionally contribute to PCL-1. The existing and alternate PCL-1 alignments do not each represent distinctly separate alignments. Moreover, 245.5 acres are shared between the two alignments, with 82.7 acres being removed from the northern portion of the existing PCL-1 alignment and 465.7 acres being added in replacement, mostly to the west and connecting to the B Canyon Undercrossing at SR91. According to the CRA, the alternate PCL-1 alignment is superior to the existing PCL-1 alignment in achieving connection between the Santa Ana Mountains and the Chino Hills. The reasons for this superiority are because it is not impacted by the high volume of traffic on Green River Road; it crosses SR-91 rather than running alongside the freeway for a stretch of approximately 1,200 feet; wildlife would navigate the BNSF railroad line from SR-91 instead of navigating both obstacles sequentially; wildlife could use the existing footbridge across the Santa

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-28
Ana River; and it leads to Aliso Canyon, which is the largest canyon in Chino Hills State Park, and therefore is a natural travel corridor for mountain lions (Puma concolor), bobcats (Lynx rufus), and other wildlife. Therefore, this conservation configuration would provide superior biological value in comparison to the existing alignment of PCL-1 through further enhancement of the movement of wildlife. Therefore, no impact would occur with the proposed Project, and no mitigation is required.

Impact BIO-5: Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? No Impact. Alternate PCL-1 will not conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. Therefore, no impact would occur with the proposed Project, and no mitigation is required.

Impact BIO-6: Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan?
No Impact. The MSHCP states that individual public and private projects within the Plan Area are expected to be designed and implemented in accordance with the Criteria for each Area Plan presented in Volume I, Section 3.2 of the MSHCP document. The goal of the MSHCP is to have a total Conservation Area in excess of 500,000 acres, including approximately 347,000 acres on existing Public/Quasi-Public (PQP) Lands, and approximately 153,000 acres of Additional Reserve Lands (ARL) to be acquired within the MSHCP Criteria Area. Projects located within the Criteria Area must be evaluated to determine if lands within those properties are described to contribute to Reserve Assembly. Criteria Refinements may be initiated by Local Permittees, or at the request of private entities to Local Permittees if agreed to by the applicable Local Permittee, either for purposes of correcting minor discrepancies or inaccuracies or for evaluating alternative conservation proposals involving single or multiple landowners and jurisdictions that are of equivalent or superior benefit to Covered Species. Such Criteria Refinements may involve changes to Cores and Linkages as long as it is demonstrated that the Refinements would clearly benefit Covered Species and would be consistent with MSHCP policies and species conservation goals.

A Criteria Refinement can be approved with lesser conservation in one or more Cells provided that the decrease is made up with other lands in the Criteria Area not described by the Criteria that satisfy the goals for Covered Habitats, Covered Species, etc., or with lands outside of the Criteria Area that similarly satisfy the goals.

As described above, although the current alignment of PCL-1 is unconstrained to the south, there are a number of existing land uses that constrain PCL-1 at its northern terminus, including SR-91, the BNSF railroad line and Green River Road. The CRA (Appendix Q) analyzed the effectiveness of the existing PCL-1 in comparison to the effectiveness of an alternative PCL-1 alignment in meeting the stated MSHCP goals for PCL-1, including the potential to connect with the Prado

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-29
Basin and the Chino Hills. Several wildlife movement studies were conducted in 2006 and 2007 for the properties that contain a majority of both the existing PCL-1 and alternate PCL-1 alignments, referred to at that time as the “Corona 850” property. The Study documented areas of wildlife movement from the Cleveland National Forest through the Corona 850 property and to SR-91. Furthermore, the movement patterns of bobcat and coyote after the widening of California State Route (SR 71) near SR-91 included analysis of camera data for other underpasses in the vicinity, including the underpass at B Canyon (u17) within the alternate PCL-1 route.

The proposed Criteria Refinement presents the alternate alignment for PCL-1, which will be made up existing MSHCP Conserved Lands and lands that have been acquired by the RCA. A total of 711.28 acres of land will be assembled for the alternate PCL-1, consisting of ten parcels. The alternate PCL-1 alignment is located immediately west of the existing PCL-1 alignment. The existing alignment begins at the boundary with Core B (Cleveland National Forest) and extends north across undeveloped land, Green River Road, and SR-91, terminating just north of SR- 91.

The alternate alignment would also begin at the boundary with Core B and extend across undeveloped land before terminating at SR-91 (Figure 3.3). Approximately 538.45 acres of the 711.28-acre total will be associated with the six Criteria Cells, with approximately 172.83 acres associated lands located outside of, but adjacent to, the Criteria Area.

Of the approximately 328.30 acres described for conservation based on the existing Cell Criteria, approximately 82.75 acres of the described lands would not be part of the alternate PCL-1, as these lands represent the northernmost part of the existing alignment that would be removed as part of the Criteria Refinement. As required by the MSHCP, all lands to be proposed as replacement via a Criteria Refinement must not be described for conservation by the current Cell Criteria. In place of those lands to be removed, approximately 292.90 acres of land would be added in alternate locations of the six Criteria Cells, i.e., areas not described for conservation, in addition to the 172.83 acres of lands to be conserved that are not in Criteria Cells.

The proposed Criteria Refinement will have a positive effect on PCL-1 by designating a superior, alternate alignment to connect Core A with Core B, thereby supporting the goal of PCL-1. The alternate PCL-1 alignment is less constrained for wildlife movement than the existing PCL-1; is more conducive to the north-south movement needed to support the connectivity goals of PCL-1; and contains a greater amount of habitat types applicable to the Planning Species for PCL-1, including coastal sage scrub, chaparral, grassland, coast live-oak woodland, and riparian habitats.

The proposed Criteria Refinement will have a positive effect on the MSHCP Conservation Area by conserving a greater amount of high-quality habitat that will support the intended functions of PCL-1, including connectivity between Core A and Core B, and live-in habitat for the PCL-1 Planning Species. As noted above, the new lands proposed for the alternate alignment will include habitats (i.e., coast live oak woodland) not characterized in the Cell Criteria for the assembly of PCL-1. The total amount of lands to be conserved for PCL-1 will increase by more than 382 acres, with most gains consisting of chaparral vegetation, but also including coastal sage scrub, grassland,

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-30
and the coast live oak woodland. Furthermore, the alternate PCL-1 alignment is less constrained for wildlife movement when compared with the existing alignment, is more conducive to northsouth wildlife movement, and contains a greater amount of habitat to support the Planning Species, as discussed previously.

Therefore, no impact would occur with the proposed Project and no mitigation is required.

5.4.6 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Volume I, Section 6.5 (Criteria Refinement Process [CRP]) of the MSHCP states that individual public and private projects within the Plan Area are expected to be designed and implemented in accordance with the Criteria for each Area Plan presented in Volume I, Section 3.2 of the MSHCP document. In cases where refinements to the Criteria are desirable to facilitate Reserve Assembly, resulting in adjustments to the Criteria, the CRP described in Volume I, Section 6.5 shall apply.

Such Criteria Refinements may involve changes to Cores and Linkages as long as it is demonstrated that the Refinements would clearly benefit Covered Species and would be consistent with MSHCP policies and species conservation goals. Furthermore, the CRP cannot be used for Criteria changes that would result in reductions in the Criteria Area.

As discussed previously, PCL- 1 is intended to connect Existing Core A (Prado Basin/Santa Ana River) with Existing Core B (Cleveland National Forest) to the south and is intended to provide live-in/dispersal habitat for four Planning Species (mountain lion, bobcat, coastal California gnatcatcher, and Cooper’s hawk). The northern portion of the existing PCL-1 alignment is severely constrained and the topography of the existing PCL-1 alignment is not ideal to facilitate north to south wildlife movement. The northern portion of the alignment is topographically oriented north to south along ridgelines and canyons, while the southern portion of the alignment bisects steep east-west ridgelines and canyons causing wildlife to move west and east perpendicular to the intended alignment for PCL-1.Lastly, the habitat types located within the existing alignment, though mostly native, are dominated by chaparral, which is not suitable for two of the MSHCP Planning Species (coastal California gnatcatcher and Cooper’s hawk).

The alternate PCL-1 location is heavily used by wildlife, with documented and extensive movement of large to medium-size mammals from the National Forest Boundary to the SR-91 undercrossing. Lands within the alternate alignment are topographically oriented north to south from the National Forest boundary to the freeway, including multiple access roads, ridgelines, and canyon routes. Furthermore, the habitat types within the alternate PCL-1 alignment have a greater suitability for the Planning Species, including habitats dominated by coastal sage scrub vegetation, as well as a greater riparian component.

The Alternative Alignment of PCL-1 would result in net gain of 382.98 acres of Conserved Land compared with the existing PCL-1 alignment, with 465.73 acres of lands offsetting the 82.75 acres of lands to be removed from the northern portion of the existing alignment.

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-31
In conclusion, the proposed Project would result in a superior MSHCP Conservation Area configuration compared with the existing PCL-1 alignment. The re-alignment would result in an increase in conservation lands for the MSHCP Reserve, including an increase in native habitat types benefitting Covered Species. The alternate PCL-1 alignment will indirectly benefit the existing Core Areas (A and B) by providing a less-constrained connection between the Core Areas.

Overall, the proposed Refinement would support the goals of the MSHCP as it applies to linking the Cleveland National Forest to the Prado Basin, Santa Ana River, and the Chino Hills.

5.4.7 SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES
No Mitigation Measures are required.

5.4.8 SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
No significant environmental impacts occur with the proposed Project.

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-32

5.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES

5.5.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The proposed PCL-1 alignment, covering approximately 711.28 acres, is within the City’s SOI within Riverside County. The alignment runs north to south from the Cleveland National Forest to SR-91. Elevations of the proposed Project range from approximately 525 feet AMSL at SR91(west of Fresno Road) in the north to approximately 2,100 AMSL in the south. The northern portion of the Project is topographically oriented north to south along ridgelines and canyons, while the southern portion crosses a series of steep east-west canyons and ridgelines.

The proposed PCL-1 alignment is comprised of undeveloped lands with dirt access roads, and heavily vegetated with coastal sage scrub, chaparral, non-native grasslands, coast live oak woodland, and riparian forest, including access roads and canyon routes. In addition, the Project alignment is largely surrounded by undeveloped lands with residential uses to the east, and Star Ranch to west.

The proposed Project would not include new development and no ground breaking activities will occur and therefore a cultural resource survey of the site is not required.

5.5.2 EXISTING REGULATIONS, PLANS, PROGRAMS, AND POLICIES Refer to the federal, State, regional, and local regulations previously referenced within Section

4.5.4 Cultural Resources prepared for the Modified Project.

5.5.3 PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES (PDF)
The proposed Project does not include PDFs.

5.5.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Based on the relevant CEQA Guidelines as currently implemented by the City, significant cultural resources impacts would occur if the proposed Project or any Project-related component would:

Threshold CUL-1 Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
Threshold CUL-2 Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
Threshold CUL-3 Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries?

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-33

5.5.5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH PROPOSED PROJECT Impact CUL-1: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
Impact CUL-2: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
Impact CUL-3: Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries?
No Impact.

As previously stated, the proposed Project would relocate the PCL-1 alignment to improve connectivity between designated wildlife habitats within the MSHCP. No development is proposed by the Project and consequently, no construction or groundbreaking activities would occur. Thus, the proposed Project would not cause an adverse change in the significance of a historical or archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5. As a result, no impacts would occur, and no mitigation measures are required.

Since no development is proposed as part of the relocation of the PCL-1 alignment, the potential for encountering human remains during grading, excavation, or construction activities is nonexistent. As a result, no impacts would occur, and no mitigation measures are required.

5.5.6 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
No Impact.

Historic Resources: The proposed PCL-1 alignment would not result in groundbreaking activities nor new development. Therefore, Project implementation would have no potential to contribute towards a significant cumulative impact to historical sites and/or resources.

Archaeological Resources: The proposed PCL-1 alignment would not result in groundbreaking activities nor new development. Therefore, Project implementation would have no potential to contribute towards a significant cumulative impact to archaeological sites and/or resources.

Disturbance of Human Remains: The proposed PCL-1 alignment would not result in groundbreaking activities nor new development and therefore no potential to uncover or disturb human remains would occur. Therefore, Project implementation would have no potential to contribute towards a significant cumulative impact to human remains.

5.5.7 SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES
No Mitigation Measures are required.

5.5.8 SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
No significant environmental impacts occur with the proposed Project.

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-34

5.6 ENERGY

5.6.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Due to the location and topography of the proposed PCL-1 alignment, development has been limited to beyond the boundary limits including Star Ranch to the west, SR-91 to the north, and residential to the east, and the vacant GRRSP area to the northeast. Other than the previously noted dirt access routes, no development has occurred or is planned within the proposed PCL-1 alignment. As a result, the proposed Project alignment does not consume energy.

5.6.2 EXISTING REGULATIONS, PLANS, PROGRAMS, AND POLICIES Refer to the federal, State, regional, and local regulations previously referenced within Section

4.6.4 Energy prepared for the Modified Project.

5.6.3 PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES (PDF)
The proposed Project does not include PDFs.

5.6.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Based on the relevant CEQA Guidelines as currently implemented by the City of Corona, significant visual quality impacts would occur if the proposed Project or any Project-related component would:

Threshold EN-1 Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation?
Threshold EN-2 Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?

5.6.5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH PROPOSED PROJECT Impact EN-1: Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation?
No Impact.

The proposed Project would relocate the PCL-1 alignment to improve connectivity between designated wildlife habitats within the MSHCP and no new development is proposed. Therefore, the Project would not result in a potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources. No impacts would occur relative to the proposed Project and no mitigation is required.

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-35
Impact EN-2: Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
No Impact. The proposed Project would relocate the PCL-1 alignment to improve connectivity between designated wildlife habitats within the MSHCP and no new development is proposed.

Therefore, the Project would not conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. The proposed Project only involves the relocation of the PCL-1 alignment and does not authorize any new development and no impacts would occur. No mitigation is required.

5.6.6 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
As previously stated, the proposed Project would not result in construction or operational energy consumption as no new development or construction activities are proposed. Therefore, energy consumption would not occur in a cumulatively wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary manner and no mitigation is required.

5.6.7 SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES
No Mitigation Measures are required.

5.6.8 SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
No significant environmental impacts occur with the proposed Project.

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-36

5.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

5.7.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Geology and Soils
The approximately 711.28-acre proposed Project alignment is located in the northern flank of the Santa Ana Mountains in western Riverside County. According to Figure 5.7, Geologic Map, of the City’s General Plan EIR, the proposed alignment area is primarily comprised of younger sediments (Holocene to Late Pleistocene), older sediments (Pleistocene) landslide deposits (Holocene to Pleistocene), younger sedimentary rocks (Cenozoic), older sedimentary rocks (Mesozoic), igneous and metamorphic rocks (Mesozoic).

Faults and Seismicity
The Project area is not located within an Alquist‐Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, however is located near the Whittier, Glen Ivy, and Chino sections of the Elsinore Fault Zone.

Liquefaction
Liquefaction takes place when loosely packed, water‐logged sediments at or near the ground surface lose their strength in response to strong ground shaking. Liquefaction occurring beneath buildings and other structures can cause major damage during earthquakes. According to the DOC Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation map, the northern portion of the Project adjacent to SR-91 is located in areas susceptible to liquefaction.

Subsidence
There are two types of subsidence: land subsidence and hydro compaction subsidence. Hydro compaction subsidence occurs when a large land area settles due to over‐saturation. Land subsidence occurs when an extensive amount of ground water, oil, or natural gas is withdrawn from below the ground surface. The General Plan EIR has determined the area most susceptible to land subsidence as being within the northwestern portion of the City, outside the Project alignment.

Dam and Levee Failure
According to the Dam Breach Inundation Map Web Publisher, the area located beyond the Project alignment northeast of SR-91 has a high susceptibility to inundation from failure of the Prado Dam.

Paleontological Resources
Paleontological resources (fossils) are the remains and/or traces of prehistoric life. Fossils are typically preserved in layered sedimentary rocks and the distribution of fossils is a result of the sedimentary history of the geologic units within which they occur. Fossils occur in a noncontinuous and often unpredictable distribution within some sedimentary units, and the potential for fossils to occur within sedimentary units depends on several factors. Although it is not possible

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-37
to determine whether a fossil will occur in any specific location, it is possible to evaluate the potential for geologic units to contain scientifically significant paleontological resources, and therefore evaluate the potential for impacts to those resources and provide mitigation for paleontological resources if they do occur during construction.

The Project alignment is underlain by Quaternary (middle to early Pleistocene) very old alluvial fan sediments and three Tertiary sedimentary formations. These geologic units are considered to contain low-to-high sensitivity for paleontological resources increasing by depth and high sensitivity.

5.7.2 EXISTING REGULATIONS, PLANS, PROGRAMS, AND POLICIES Refer to the federal, State, regional, and local regulations previously referenced within Section

4.7.4 Geology and Soils prepared for the Modified Project.

5.7.3 PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES (PDF)
The proposed Project does not include PDFs.

5.7.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Based on the relevant CEQA Guidelines as currently implemented by the City of Corona, significant visual quality impacts would occur if the proposed Project or any Project-related component would:

Threshold GEO-1 Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault?
Threshold GEO-2 Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving strong seismic ground shaking? Threshold GEO-3 Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
Threshold GEO-4 Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving landslides? Threshold GEO-5 Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Threshold GEO-6 Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable or that would become unstable as a result of the project and potentially result in an on-site or offsite landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-38
Threshold GEO-7 Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property?
Threshold GEO-8 Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems in areas where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater?
Threshold GEO-9 Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature?

5.7.5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH PROPOSED PROJECT Impact GEO-1: a) Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Impact GEO-2: ii) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving strong seismic ground shaking?
Impact GEO-3: iii) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
Impact GEO-4: iv) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving landslides? Impact GEO-5: Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Impact GEO-6: Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable or that would become unstable as a result of the project and potentially result in an on-site or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
Impact GEO-7: Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property?
No Impact.

There are mapped Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones within the City limits associated with the Chino Fault and Glen Ivy segment of the Elsinore Fault. As previously stated, the proposed Project alignment is located within the Elsinore Fault Zone, although not within a Alquist-Priolo

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-39
Earthquake Fault Zone. No new development or construction activities would result from the proposed Project. Consequently, the Project area would remain vacant and undeveloped, therefore no impact would occur.

Other geologic hazards include earthquake liquefaction and landslides. The western portion of the Project alignment adjacent to SR-91 is located within an area with moderate liquefaction susceptibility. Due to the Project’s location and topography, the hillsides or steep slopes may result in landslides from heavy rain, erosion, removal of vegetation, seismic activity, or combinations of these and other factors. As previously stated, the Project area would remain vacant and undeveloped, therefore no impact would occur and no mitigation is required.

Impact GEO-8: Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems in areas where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater?
No Impact. Septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems are not proposed as part of the Project. No impacts related to septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems would occur from implementation of the proposed Project.

Impact GEO-9: Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature?
No Impact. Although the Project site located within an area of which may have high Paleontological sensitivity, the Project proposes the relocation of PCL-1 alignment and does not involve earth moving and/or construction of new development. As a result, no impacts would occur., and no mitigation is required.

5.7.6 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Geology and Soils. The Project proposes the relocation of the PCL-1 alignment and does not involve construction of new development. No impacts associated with geologic resources would occur.

Paleontological Resources: The proposed Project does not involve earth moving and/or construction of new development that would otherwise impact such resources. No impact to palaeontologic resources would occur.

5.7.7 SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES
No Mitigation Measures are required.

5.7.8 SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
No significant environmental impacts occur with the proposed Project.

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-40

5.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

5.8.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Greenhouse gases (GHGs) are any gas that absorbs infrared radiation in the atmosphere. This absorption traps heat within the atmosphere, altering the Earth’s surface temperature. Increased surface temperatures caused by increased absorption of the sun’s infrared radiation from GHGs is commonly referred to as the greenhouse gas effect. A majority of the scientific community believes GHG emissions resulting from human activities have caused increased levels of most naturally occurring GHGs measured in the atmosphere over the past several decades. Regardless of the cause, the majority of the scientific community believes the continued increase of these GHG levels will result in an increase in the temperature of the Earth’s lower atmosphere. This increase in atmospheric temperature from increased GHGs is a phenomenon commonly referred to as global warming. Warming of the Earth’s lower atmosphere induces a suite of additional changes, including changes in global precipitation patterns; ocean circulation, temperature, and acidity; global mean sea level; species distribution and diversity; and the timing of biological processes.

These large-scale changes are collectively referred to as global climate change. The GHGs listed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), fluoroform (HFC-23), tetrafluoroethane (HFC-134a), difluoroethane (HFC-152a), and sulfur hexaflouride (SF6) (IPCC 2022).

The Global Warming Potential (GWP) was developed to simplify quantification, reporting, analysis, and comparison of the global warming impacts of different GHGs. IPCC defines the GWP of various GHG emissions on a normalized scale that recasts all GHG emissions in terms of CO2 equivalents (CO2e). The GWP of CO2 is, by definition, 1. GHG emissions are quantified and presented in terms of metric tons (MT) of CO2e emitted per year.

5.8.2 EXISTING REGULATIONS, PLANS, PROGRAMS, AND POLICIES Refer to the federal, State, regional, and local regulations previously referenced within Section

4.8.4 Greenhouse Gas Emissions prepared for the Modified Project.

5.8.3 PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES (PDF)
The proposed Project does not include PDFs.

5.8.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Based on the relevant CEQA Guidelines as currently implemented by the City of Corona, significant greenhouse gas emissions impacts would occur if the proposed Project or any Projectrelated component would:

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-41
Threshold GHG-1 Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Threshold GHG-2 Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?

5.8.5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH PROPOSED PROJECT Impact GHG-1: Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Impact GHG-2: Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
No Impact.

The Project proposes the relocation of PCL-1 alignment and does not involve construction of new development. The proposed Project alignment area would remain vacant and undeveloped.

Therefore, the Project will not indirectly or directly generate GHGs that may have a significant impact on the environment or conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs. As such, no impacts would occur, and no mitigation is required.

5.8.6 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
As discussed in this section, the proposed Project would not result in new development resulting in construction or operational GHG emissions. Therefore, the Project would not contribute to cumulative GHG emissions in California.

5.8.7 SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES
No Mitigation Measures are required.

5.8.8 SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
No significant environmental impacts occur with the proposed Project.

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-42

5.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

5.9.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
As previously stated, the proposed PCL-1 alignment covers approximately 711.28 acres in the City’s SOI within Riverside County. The alignment runs north to south from the Cleveland National Forest to SR-91. Elevations of the proposed Project range from approximately 525 feet AMSL at SR-91(west of Fresno Road) in the north to approximately 2,100 AMSL in the south.

The northern portion of the Project is topographically oriented north to south along ridgelines and canyons, while the southern portion crosses a series of steep east-west canyons and ridgelines. The proposed Project alignment is comprised of undeveloped lands with dirt access roads, and heavily vegetated with coastal sage scrub, chaparral, non-native grasslands, coast live oak woodland, and riparian forest, including access roads and canyon routes.

Hazardous Locations
The Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites (Cortese) List is a planning document used by the State, local agencies, and developers to comply with CEQA requirements in providing information about the location of hazardous materials release sites. Government Code Section 65962.5 requires the California Environmental Protection Agency to develop at least annually an updated Cortese List. According to the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) EnviroStor database, there are no facilities and/or sites within the Project alignment identified as meeting the Cortese List requirements.

Airports
The Corona Municipal Airport is located approximately 3.75 miles northeast of Project alignment.

Emergency Response Plan
The City of Corona has prepared an Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) to address the City’s planned response to natural disasters, technological incidents, and national security emergencies.

The EOP’s operational concepts focus on potential large-scale disasters that can generate unique situations requiring unusual emergency responses. The EOP’s emergency management goals are:

1. Provide effective life safety measures and reduce property losses.

2. Provide for the rapid resumption of impacted businesses and community services.

3. Provide accurate documentation and records required for cost recovery efforts.

It should be noted, the EOP does not address normal day-to-day emergencies or the wellestablished and routine procedures used in coping with such emergencies.

Sensitive Receptors

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-43
Sensitive receptors are people or other organisms that may have a significantly increased sensitivity or exposure to contaminants by virtue of their age and health (e.g., schools, day care centers, hospitals, nursing homes), status (e.g., sensitive or endangered species), proximity to the contamination, dwelling construction (e.g., basement), or the facilities they use (e.g., water supply well). The location of sensitive receptors must be identified in order to evaluate the potential impact of the contamination on public health and the environment. The Project alignment is surrounded by mostly undeveloped lands, SR-91 to the north, residential uses to the east, and Star Ranch to west.

5.9.2 EXISTING REGULATIONS, PLANS, PROGRAMS, AND POLICIES Refer to the federal, State, regional, and local regulations previously referenced within Section

4.9.4 Hazards and Hazardous Materials prepared for the Modified Project.

5.9.3 PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES (PDF)
The proposed Project does not include PDFs.

5.9.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Based on the relevant CEQA Guidelines as currently implemented by the City of Corona, significant hazard and hazardous material impacts would occur if the proposed Project or any Project-related component would:

Threshold HAZ-1 Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Threshold HAZ-2 Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
Threshold HAZ-3 Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
Threshold HAZ-4 Be located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous materials sites that is compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? Threshold HAZ-5 For a project within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-44
Threshold HAZ-6 Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Threshold HAZ-7 Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?

5.9.5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH PROPOSED PROJECT Impact HAZ-1: Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Impact HAZ-2: Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
Impact HAZ-3: Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
No Impact. The proposed Project consists of the relocation of the PCL-1 alignment. No physical improvements or additional construction activities would occur which could include the use or storage of hazardous substances. As a result, no impact would occur, and no mitigation is required.

Impact HAZ-4: Be located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous materials sites that is compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
No Impact. As previously stated, the Project area does not contain facilities and/or sites that are identified as meeting the Cortese List requirements. In addition, there is no construction or groundbreaking activities as a result of the Project. Therefore, there would be no impact, and no mitigation is required.

Impact HAZ-5: For a project within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?
No Impact. The Corona Municipal Airport is located approximately 3.75 miles northeast of Project alignment. Consequently, the Project site is not within two miles of an airport. In addition, the Project alignment is not located within any land use compatibility zone for the nearest airport, nor is it within an airport safety zone. Although the Project proposes no construction or operational activities, the Project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the Project areas, and no impacts would occur. No mitigation measures are required.

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-45
Impact HAZ-6: Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
No Impact. The Project will not construct any physical barriers or disturb any roadways. The Project would not interfere with implementation of an emergency response plan or evacuation plan, and there would be no impact. No mitigation measures are required.

Impact HAZ-7: Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires? No Impact. Although the Project alignment is within a Very High Hazard Fire Severity Zone (CALFIRE), there would be no new construction as a result of the proposed Project that would otherwise expose people or structures to significant risk involving wildland fires. As a result, no impacts would occur, and no mitigation is required.

5.9.6 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in construction of any new development.

As a result, no cumulative impacts associated with hazardous materials, emergency response, wildland fires, and airport safety hazards would result.

5.9.7 SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES
No Mitigation Measures are required.

5.9.8 SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
No significant environmental impacts occur with the proposed Project.

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-46

5.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY

5.10.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Regional Drainage
The City resides within the regional Santa Ana River Watershed, monitored by the Santa Ana RWQCB. Ultimately, all channels converge with the Santa Ana River within the Santa Ana Subwatershed where downstream ends of the channel travel through Orange County prior to emptying into the Pacific Ocean.

Local Surface Waters
Within the Santa Ana Sub-watershed the City lies within the Middle Santa Ana River Subwatershed and the Temescal Wash Sub-watershed. The Middle Santa Ana River Sub-watershed is located in the northwest corner of Riverside County and covers a total tributary area of 170 square miles that generally drains westwards towards the Santa Ana River. Tributaries to this subwatershed include: Temescal Creek, Sycamore Creek, Day Creek, and San Sevaine Creek. The Temescal Sub-watershed covers 250 square miles and is defined as the tributary area draining into the Temescal Wash, also known as Temescal Creek, that connects Lake Elsinore with the Santa Ana River.

Existing Drainage
The proposed Project’s alignment, approximately 711.28 acres, is vacant undeveloped land situated in the Santa Ana Mountains to the northwest of the City of Corona adjacent to SR-91. The Project alignment can be characterized by steep topography, generally increasing in elevation from the south to the north. Small ravines are present which convey the natural drainage across the Project site.

5.10.2 EXISTING REGULATIONS, PLANS, PROGRAMS, AND POLICIES Refer to the federal, State, regional, and local regulations previously referenced within Section

4.10.4 Hydrology and Water Quality prepared for the Modified Project.

5.10.3 PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES (PDF)
The proposed Project does not include PDFs.

5.10.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Based on the relevant CEQA Guidelines as currently implemented by the City of Corona, significant hydrology and water quality impacts would occur if the proposed Project or any Project-related component would:

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-47
Threshold HYD-1 Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality? Threshold HYD-2 Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
Threshold HYD-3 Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
Threshold HYD-4 Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite?
Threshold HYD-5 Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
Threshold HYD-6 Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would impede or redirect flood flows?
Threshold HYD-7 In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
Threshold HYD-8 Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?

5.10.5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH PROPOSED PROJECT Impact HYD-1: Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality? No Impact. The proposed Project alignment lies within Temescal Wash Sub-watershed, which drains to the Santa Ana River and eventually drains to the Pacific Ocean in Orange County. The watershed is under the authority of the Santa Ana RWQCB. The proposed Project does not consist of any new development and therefore will not require earth moving, construction, or operational

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-48
activities and therefore will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality. Therefore, no impact would occur, and no mitigation measures are required.

Impact HYD-2: Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? No Impact. The relocation of PCL-1 alignment does not include new development, and thus, will not have a direct impact on substantially decreasing groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge. As a result, no impacts would occur, and no mitigation is required.

Impact HYD-3: Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? Impact HYD-4: Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite?
Impact HYD-5: Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
Impact HYD-6: Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would impede or redirect flood flows?
No Impact. The relocation of PCL-1 alignment would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of a site or area because the proposed Project does not include new development. The proposed Project would not result in the addition of impervious surfaces in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site, substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite, or create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. No impacts would occur.

Impact HYD-7: In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-49
No Impact. According to FEMA’s National Flood Layer Viewer, the Project alignment is classified as Flood Zone X, area of minimal flood hazard. The Project alignment is located approximately 26 miles northeast of the Pacific Ocean. Therefore, the Project alignment is not located within a tsunami zone. Similarly, a seiche is the sloshing of a closed body of water from earthquake shaking. Seiches are of concern relative to water storage facilities because inundation from a seiche can occur if the wave overflows a containment wall, such as the wall of a reservoir, water storage tank, dam, or other artificial body of water. The nearest body of water is the Prado Reservoir, approximately 1.2 miles to the north. According to the City’s General Plan, the Project site is not within a dam inundation zone, nor in the vicinity of any impounded bodies of water; therefore, the Project is not at risk of a seiche. As a result, no impacts would occur, and no mitigation is required.

Impact HYD-8: Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
No Impact. The proposed relocation of PCL-1 alignment would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable ground water management plan because the proposed Project does not include new development. As a result, no impacts would occur, and no mitigation measures are required.

5.10.6 CUMULTIVE IMPACTS
As discussed previously, the proposed Project would not require construction or operational activities. Consequently, compliance with obligatory construction and development related hydrology and water quality related procedures is not required. The proposed Project alignment would not result in an increase of impervious surfaces within the watershed, nor increase surface runoff or significant pollutant loadings and impacts would not be cumulatively considerable

5.10.7 SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES
No Mitigation Measures are required.

5.10.8 SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
No significant environmental impacts occur with the proposed Project.

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-50

5.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING

5.11.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The existing zoning the proposed Project alignment overlays is Residential Rural (R-R) (Riverside County) and the land use designation Rural Mountainous (SOI). Although residential development would be allowed within the Project alignment, the Project does not propose any new development.

5.11.2 EXISTING REGULATIONS, PLANS, PROGRAMS, AND POLICIES Refer to the federal, State, regional, and local regulations previously referenced within Section

4.11.4 Land Use and Planning prepared for the Modified Project.

5.11.3 PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES (PDF)
The proposed Project does not include PDFs.

5.11.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Based on the relevant CEQA Guidelines as currently implemented by the City of Corona, significant land use and planning impacts would occur if the proposed Project or any Projectrelated component would:

Threshold LU-1 Physically divide an established community? Threshold LU-2 Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?

5.11.5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH PROPOSED PROJECT Impact LU-1: Physically divide an established community? No Impact. The proposed Project alignment is comprised of undeveloped lands with dirt access roads, and heavily vegetated with access roads and canyon routes. The existing zoning for the proposed Project alignment overlays Residential Rural (R-R) (Riverside County) and Rural Mountainous (SOI) land uses; however, the Project does not propose any new development. The Project proposes to improve wildlife linkage with a superior corridor by connecting wildlife habitats while conserving additional lands. The proposed relocation of PCL-1 alignment would not physically divide an established community. As a result, there would be no impact, and no mitigation measures are required.

Impact LU-2: Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-51
No Impact. The Project proposes the relocation of the PCL-1 alignment. The existing zoning for the proposed Project alignment overlays Residential Rural (R-R) (Riverside County) and Rural Mountainous (SOI) land uses. Although residential development would be allowed within the Project alignment, the Project does not propose any new development. Therefore, future development will conform with the City’s 2020-2040 General Plan and any policies or regulations that the City has adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. As a result, no impact would occur, and no mitigation measures are required.

5.11.6 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
As discussed under Impact LU-1, the proposed Project would not physically divide an established community. Similarly, the proposed Project was found to have no impact with applicable General Plan land use plans, policies, and regulations adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. Lastly, as detailed in Section 5.4 of this section, the proposed Project was found to be consistent with the MSHCP. All three of these topics are inherently cumulative in nature, and therefore the proposed Project would not result in cumulative impacts.

5.11.7 SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES
No Mitigation Measures are required.

5.11.8 SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
No significant environmental impacts occur with the proposed Project.

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-52

5.12 MINERAL RESOURCES

5.12.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The PCL-1 alignment geology includes sedimentary rock overlayed with alluvium deposits. The deposits include older alluvium related to ancient channels of the Santa Ana River and younger alluvium from the Santa Ana River and tributary drainages from the Santa Ana Mountains.

Construction related mineral deposits consisting of clays, sand, gravel and rock are found in the Santa Ana Mountains, plus trace amounts of silver, lead, zinc, coal, and gypsum.

According to the City’s 2020-2040 General Plan, the Project alignment is within the following classifications:
• MRZ-1: A Mineral Resource Zone where adequate information indicates that no significant mineral deposits are present or likely to be present.
• MRZ-3: A Mineral Resource Zone where the significance of mineral deposits cannot be determined from the available data.

5.12.2 EXISTING REGULATIONS, PLANS, PROGRAMS, AND POLICIES Refer to the federal, State, regional, and local regulations previously referenced within Section

4.12.4 Mineral Resources prepared for the Modified Project.

5.12.3 PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES (PDF)
The proposed Project does not include PDFs.

5.12.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Based on the relevant CEQA Guidelines as currently implemented by the City of Corona, significant mineral resource impacts would occur if the proposed Project or any Project-related component would:

Threshold MNR-1 Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
Threshold MNR-2 Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?

5.12.5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH PROPOSED PROJECT Impact MNR-1: Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-53
Impact MNR-2: Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
No Impact. The Project alignment is located within an area classified as the MRZ-1 and MRZ-3.

MRZ-1 and MRZ-3 classifications do not include mineral resources of statewide, regional, or local significance. The proposed Project does not include any new development, nor require construction or groundbreaking activities. Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in the loss of availability of know mineral resources that would be of value to the region, the state, or the local community. As a result, no impact would occur, and no mitigation is required.

5.12.6 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
As discussed above, the proposed Project would not result in the loss of or availability of a locally or regionally significant mineral resource. Therefore, the proposed Project’s effect on mineral resources would have no cumulatively impact.

5.12.7 SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES
No Mitigation Measures are required.

5.12.8 SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
No significant environmental impacts occur with the proposed Project.

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-54

5.13 NOISE

5.13.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Due to the location and topography of the proposed alignment, development has been limited to beyond the boundary limits including Star Ranch to the west, SR-91 to the north, and residential to the east, and the vacant GRRSP to the northeast. Other than the previously noted dirt access routes, no development has occurred or is planned within the proposed alignment. Ambient noise is dominated by traffic noise from SR-91 within the Project alignment. As stated in this section, the Project would not result in new development and the existing environment would remain intact.

5.13.2 EXISTING REGULATIONS, PLANS, PROGRAMS, AND POLICIES Refer to the federal, State, regional, and local regulations previously referenced within Section

4.13.4 Noise prepared for the Modified Project.

5.13.3 PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES (PDF)
The proposed Project does not include PDFs.

5.13.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Based on the relevant CEQA Guidelines as currently implemented by the City of Corona, significant noise impacts would occur if the proposed Project or any Project-related component would:

Threshold N-1 Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
Threshold N-2 Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
Threshold N-3 For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?

METHODOLOGY

5.13.5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH PROPOSED PROJECT Impact N-1: Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess standards

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-55
established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
Impact N-2: Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
No Impact. The Project proposes the relocation of the PCL-1 alignment. The Project does not include any new development, and therefore, does not involve any grading or construction of new buildings and/or facilities. The proposed Project will not generate a temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the Project in excess of standards established in the general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies, or produce excessive ground borne noise levels. As a result, no impacts would occur, and no mitigation is required.

Impact N-3: For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
No Impact. As previously discussed, the Corona Municipal Airport is located approximately 3.75 miles northeast of Project alignment. The Project does not include any new development.

Therefore, the proposed relocation of the PCL-1 alignment would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the Project alignment. No impacts would occur, and no mitigation measures are required.

5.13.6 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in short-term construction or long-term operational noise generating activities as no new development is proposed. As a result, the proposed Project’s potential to contribute to any noise or vibration- related impacts would not be cumulatively considerable.

5.13.7 SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES
No Mitigation Measures are required.

5.13.8 SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
No significant environmental impacts occur with the proposed Project.

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-56

5.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING

5.14.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The proposed Project’s alignment, approximately 711.28 acres, is in the City’s SOI within Riverside County. According to the estimates released in May 2024 by the State DOF, the City’s 2024 population is estimated to be 156,615 and the City’s 2024 housing is estimated to be 50,915 units.

As discussed, the existing environment within the proposed alignment is vacant undeveloped land of which is heavily vegetated with dirt access and canyon routes. The existing land use and zoning within the proposed alignment would allow for residential development. No development is proposed as part of the Project.

5.14.2 EXISTING REGULATIONS, PLANS, PROGRAMS, AND POLICIES Refer to the federal, State, regional, and local regulations previously referenced within Section

4.14.4 Population and Housing prepared for the Modified Project.

5.14.3 PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES (PDF)
The proposed Project does not include PDFs.

5.14.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Based on the relevant CEQA Guidelines as currently implemented by the City of Corona, significant visual quality impacts would occur if the proposed Project or any Project-related component would:

Threshold POP-1 Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
Threshold POP-2 Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?

5.14.5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH PROPOSED PROJECT Impact POP-1: Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? No Impact. The proposed Project would not involve the construction of any homes, business, or other uses that would result in population growth. As a result, no impact would occur, and no mitigation measures are required.

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-57
Impact POP-2: Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact. As discussed above, the Project alignment is comprised of vacant undeveloped land and the existing environment will remain intact. Although residential uses are allowed within the Project alignment, the Project does not propose any development. As a result, no impact would occur, and no mitigation measures are required.

5.14.6 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
As discussed above, the proposed Project would not result in growth inducement or displacement of people or housing because no development is proposed and no residences would be removed.

As a result, impacts related to cumulative growth would be less than significant and not cumulatively considerable.

5.14.7 SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES
No Mitigation Measures are required.

5.14.8 SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
No significant environmental impacts occur with the proposed Project.

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-58

5.15 PUBLIC SERVICES

5.15.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Project site located within the western portion of the City bounded by undeveloped land on the south and west, partially developed land to the east, SR-91 to the north, and the Star Ranch to the west. The Cleveland National Forest I located further to the south. The Project area is within a Local Responsibility Area (LRA) designated as a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Area (FHSZ).

Fire Protection
The City is served by the Corona Fire Department (CFD) of which operates seven fire stations in addition to the CFD Headquarters. The CFD staff consists of 244 firefighters and 107 sworn fire personnel. The Project site is within the response area of CFD, Fire Station 5 located at 1200 West Canyon Crest Drive, Fire Station 5 is located 1 mile east of the Project alignment along Green River Road.

Police Protection
Corona Police Department (CPD) will provide service for the Project alignment with 144 sworn officers and 63 support staff. The Project alignment is closest to substation Zone 4, which is the entire west end of the City, located approximately 5 miles from the proposed Project alignment.

The substation offices are used by patrol officers for returning calls to residents and business owners and also as a report-writing station. The CPD suggests that any matter needing police attention is brought forward through the main station, located at the corner of West 6th Street and Buena Vista Avenue. The main station is located approximately 9 miles from the proposed Project site.

Schools
The Corona-Norco Unified School District (CNUSD) serves most adults and youth in Corona, which includes K-12 education, alternative education, and adult education. There are 34 schools that serve more than 33,000 students in the community. Corona has 14 private schools— Montessori schools, alternative education, and religious.

The proposed PCL-1 alignment is located within the CNUSD, and the nearest existing school Prado View Elementary School is located approximately 1.5 miles to the east of the site.

Recreation
Please see Section 5.16 Recreation, for a thorough discussion of the proposed Project’s impacts associated with parks.

Other Public Facilities
The Corona Public Library (CPL) is located at 605 South Main Street, and is a 62,000-square-foot facility. The CPL serves the City and circulates over 500,000 items each year. The CPL’s services

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-59
have expanded to include U.S. Passport Services, notary, online tutoring, test proctoring, small business consulting, and Fair Housing assistance. The CPL hosted more than 629 programs, tours and class visits with 23,522 attendees and contains the W.D. Addison Heritage Room which covers all periods of time, and includes photographs, rare books, newspapers, citrus labels, manuscripts, oral histories, artefacts, and other items available for the public to view.

5.15.2 EXISTING REGULATIONS, PLANS, PROGRAMS, AND POLICIES Refer to the federal, State, regional, and local regulations previously referenced within Section

4.15.4 Public Services prepared for the Modified Project.

5.15.3 PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES (PDF)
The proposed Project does not include PDFs.

5.15.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Based on the relevant CEQA Guidelines as currently implemented by the City of Corona, significant public service impacts would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:

Threshold PS-1 Fire protection?
Threshold PS-2 Police protection?
Threshold PS-3 Schools?
Threshold PS-4 Parks?
Threshold PS-5 Other public facilities?

5.15.5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH PROPOSED PROJECT Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:

Impact PS-1: Fire protection?
Impact PS-2: Police protection?
Impact PS-3: Schools?
impact PS-4: Parks?

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-60
Impact PS-5: Other public facilities?
No Impact. As stated in this section, the proposed relocation of the PCL-1 alignment would not result in new development and the existing vacant undeveloped environment would remain as such.

The proposed PCL-1 alignment would not result in any development. The public services provided by the City would not be impacted with implementation of the relocation of PCL-1. Thus, public services would continue provide such services under the same conditions resulting in no demand increase on public services. Consequently, the Project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts to the environment associated with the construction of new or physically altered governmental facilities, and no mitigation measures are required.

5.15.6 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
As discussed above, the proposed Project would not result in environmental impacts from increased demand on public services because no development is proposed. Cumulative impacts related to construction of new or renovated public facilities would be less than significant and not cumulatively considerable.

5.15.7 SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES
No Mitigation Measures are required.

5.15.8 SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
No significant environmental impacts occur with the proposed Project.

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-61

5.16 RECREATION

5.16.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The City offers a variety of recreational opportunities for residents and the surrounding communities. These include natural open space areas, trails, parklands, and recreational facilities and programs. In addition, there are natural open space areas like mountains, hillsides, canyons, and preserves nearby. The City also has built and natural trails for hiking, biking, and walking.

There are 35 public parks throughout Corona and a variety of recreational facilities including community centers, a senior center, and a library. The Library and Recreation Services Department provides programs and services for all ages.

5.16.2 EXISTING REGULATIONS, PLANS, PROGRAMS, AND POLICIES Refer to the federal, State, regional, and local regulations previously referenced within Section

4.16.4 Recreation prepared for the Modified Project.

5.16.3 PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES (PDF)
The proposed Project does not include PDFs.

5.16.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Based on the relevant CEQA Guidelines as currently implemented by the City of Corona, significant recreation impacts would occur if the proposed Project or any Project-related component would:

Threshold REC-1 Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? Threshold REC-2 Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction of or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?

5.16.5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH PROPOSED PROJECT Impact REC-1: Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? Impact REC-2: Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction of or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-62
No Impact. The proposed Project consists of the relocation of the PCL-1 alignment. The Project does not propose any new development; therefore, Project implementation would not increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities. The Project does not propose any recreational facilities and does not require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. As such, no impacts would occur, and no mitigation measures are required.

5.16.6 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
As discussed under impact REC-1 and REC -2, the proposed Project does not propose new development nor the construction of a new or renovation of an existing park or recreational facility that would result in and impact to the environment. Therefore, the proposed Project would result in no cumulative impacts associated with recreation.

5.16.7 SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES
No Mitigation Measures are required.

5.16.8 SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
No significant environmental impacts occur with the proposed Project.

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-63

5.17 TRANSPORTATION

5.17.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Project vicinity is comprised of both undeveloped and urban areas, with city roads, interstate and highway systems traversing the region. The City's roads within the Project vicinity are grouped by how important they are for moving traffic (through streets) or getting to nearby places (local streets). Roads also differ in size, speed limits, and features like sidewalks. Public transportation like buses and trains provide transportation throughout the City and surrounding communities.

As stated, the proposed Project does not include new development. The proposed PCL-1 alignment is currently vacant and undeveloped and would remain as such. To analyze traffic for new development projects, the key information is project trip generation and vehicle miles traveled.

Because the proposed project would result in no trips, traffic analysis for the proposed Project is not required.

5.17.2 EXISTING REGULATIONS, PLANS, PROGRAMS, AND POLICIES Refer to the federal, State, regional, and local regulations previously referenced within Section

4.17.4 Transportation prepared for the Modified Project.

5.17.3 PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES (PDF)
The proposed Project does not include PDFs.

5.17.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Based on the relevant CEQA Guidelines as currently implemented by the City of Corona, significant transportation impacts would occur if the proposed Project or any Project-related component would:

Threshold TRA-1 Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities?
Threshold TRA-2 Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
Threshold TRA-3 Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
Threshold TRA-4 Result in inadequate emergency access?

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-64

5.17.5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH PROPOSED PROJECT Impact TRA-1: Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities?
Impact TRA-2: Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
Impact TRA-3: Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
Impact TRA-4: Result in inadequate emergency access?
No Impact. No new construction would occur as part of the Project, thus construction or operational traffic related impacts would not occur. Therefore, the Project will not have an impact with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities.

Additionally, the Project would not design or construct any new roadways, and there would be no sharp curves or dangerous intersections along local roadways used for the Project that would increase traffic safety hazards. With implementation of the proposed PCL-1 alignment, there would be no temporary road closures that could result in inadequate emergency access, nor would the Project induce large volumes of traffic which could pose a roadway restriction. As a result, transportation related impacts would not occur, and no mitigation measures are required.

5.17.6 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
As discussed previously, transportation impacts would not occur with implementation of the Project as construction and operational activities would not occur. Therefore, no cumulative transportation impacts would occur.

5.17.7 SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES
No Mitigation Measures are required.

5.17.8 SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
No significant environmental impacts occur with the proposed Project.

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-65

5.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES

5.18.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
As previously stated in this section, the proposed Project encompasses approximately 711.28 acres, within the City’s SOI. The alignment travels north from the Cleveland National Forest to the SR91 with elevations ranging from approximately 525 feet AMSL at SR-91(west of Fresno Road) in the north to 2,100 AMSL in the south. The proposed Project alignment is comprised of undeveloped lands with dirt access roads, and heavily vegetated with ridgelines, canyons, and access roads. The Project alignment is largely surrounded by undeveloped lands with residential uses to the east, and Star Ranch to west.

In accordance with AB 52 and SB 18 requirements, and as stated in Section 4.18, Tribal Cultural Resources, the City sent invitation letters to representatives of the Native American contacts provided by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), formally inviting tribes to consult with the City on the Modified Project. The intent of the consultations is to provide an opportunity for interested Native American contacts to work together with the City during the Project planning process to identify and protect tribal cultural resources. Response letters were received from the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation.

As previously analyzed, the proposed Project would not include new development, therefore no ground breaking activities would occur.

5.18.2 EXISTING REGULATIONS, PLANS, PROGRAMS, AND POLICIES Refer to the federal, State, regional, and local regulations previously referenced within Section

4.18.4 Tribal Cultural Resources prepared for the Modified Project.

5.18.3 PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES (PDF)
The proposed Project does not include PDFs.

5.18.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Based on the relevant CEQA Guidelines as currently implemented by the City of Corona, significant tribal cultural resource impacts would occur if the proposed Project or any Projectrelated component if the Project would cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is either:

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-66
Threshold TRC-1 Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1 (k); or
Threshold TRC-2 A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

5.18.5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH PROPOSED PROJECT Result in a significant impact if the Project would cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is either:

Impact TRC-1: Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1 (k); or
Impact TRC-2: A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

No Impact. As previously stated, the proposed Project would relocate the PCL-1 alignment to improve connectivity between designated wildlife habitats defined by the MSHCP. No development is proposed by the Project and no construction or groundbreaking activities would occur. Since no development ore construction is proposed as part of the relocation of the PCL-1 alignment, the potential for encountering tribal cultural resources would not occur. The proposed Project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource resulting in no impact and no mitigation measures are required.

5.18.6 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
As described above, the proposed Project would not result in the disturbance of known or unknow tribal cultural resources, as ground disturbance activities would occur. Therefore, the proposed Project would not contribute to a cumulative loss of tribal cultural resources.

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-67

5.18.7 SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES
No Mitigation Measures are required.

5.18.8 SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
No significant environmental impacts occur with the proposed Project.

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-68

5.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

5.19.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Water Service
Water service to the Project vicinity will be provided by the City of Corona Utilities Department.

Sewer System
Sewer and sanitation services to the Project vicinity will be provided by the City of Corona Utilities Department\.

Solid Waste Services
The Riverside County Department of Waste Resources (RCDWR) is responsible for the efficient and effective landfill disposal of non-hazardous waste within the County, and operates six active landfills in addition to holding a contract agreement to dispose of waste at the private El Sobrante Landfill (Riverside County, 2015). The City of Corona contracts with Waste Management Inc. (WMI) for trash and recycling services.

Other Service
The Project vicinity is also located in the service territories of the Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas) (natural gas) and Southern California Edison (electricity).

As stated in this section, no new development or construction activities would result from implementation of the proposed Project. The Project area would remain vacant and undeveloped.

For a in a more in-depth discussion of existing water service, sewer system, solid waste services, and other services within the existing alignment area, refer to Section 5.19.3.

5.19.2 EXISTING REGULATIONS, PLANS, PROGRAMS, AND POLICIES Refer to the federal, State, regional, and local regulations previously referenced within Section

4.19.4 Utilities and Service Systems prepared for the Modified Project.

5.19.3 PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES (PDF)
The proposed Project does not include PDFs.

5.19.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Based on the relevant CEQA Guidelines as currently implemented by the City of Corona, significant utilities and service systems impacts would occur if the proposed Project or any Projectrelated component would:

Threshold USS-1 Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas,

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-69
or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
Threshold USS-2 Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? Threshold USS-3 Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing comments? Threshold USS-4 Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
Threshold USS-5 Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?

METHODOLOGY
The evaluation of utilities identifies if utility demand from the proposed Project would be accommodated via existing utility infrastructure that would also be available to the proposed Project. The evaluation identifies if expansions would be required to serve the proposed Project, and if those expansions have the potential to result in an environmental impact. As stated, no development would result with implementation of the proposed Project and the undeveloped nature of the alignment would remain.

5.19.5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH PROPOSED PROJECT Impact USS-1: Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? No Impact. The proposed Project consists of the relocation of PCL-1 alignment, and does not propose any new development; thus, the Project will not utilize any utilities or require connection to utilities. Therefore, the Project will not result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment, or storm water, drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities. As a result, no impact would occur, and no mitigation measures are required.

Impact USS-2: Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years?
No Impact. The proposed relocation of PCL-1 alignment does not include any new development.

The DWP currently serves the Project vicinity. Due to the lack of development proposed by the

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-70
Project, no water supplies are needed to support the Project nor the existing undeveloped conditions. As a result, no impact would occur, and no mitigation measures are required.

Impact USS-3: Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing comments?
No Impact. The proposed relocation of PCL-1 alignment does not include any new development.

The relocation of the alignment would not result in activity which will demand wastewater treatment services that exceed the adequate capacity of providers. As a result, no impact would occur, and no mitigation measures are required.

IMPACT USS-4: Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
No Impact. The proposed relocation of PCL-1 alignment does not include any new development.

Thus, the Project would not generate solid waste in excess of or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure. As a result, no impact would occur, and no mitigation measures are required.

IMPACT USS-5: Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
No Impact. The proposed relocation of PCL-1 alignment does not include any new development.

As a result, no impact would occur, and no mitigation measures are required.

5.19.6 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Water
As described previously, the proposed relocation of PCL-1 alignment does not include any new development. As discussed above, the Project would not result in an increase in water demand.

Thus, potential cumulative impacts would not occur.

Wastewater
As described previously, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in an increase flow impacting the sewer system and wastewater treatment plant capacity as no development is proposed. Cumulative impacts would not occur.

Stormwater
As described above, the proposed Project would not result in new development and would not include installation of a storm drain system. Thus, no increase in offsite stormwater flows would occur.

Solid Waste

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-71
As stated, the proposed Project would not result in construction or operational activities that would result in the generation of solid waste. Thus, impacts associated with solid waste would not occur and would not be cumulatively considerable.

Dry Utilities
As stated, no development would result from implementation of the proposed relocation of PCL1 alignment. Therefore, cumulatively considerable impacts associated with the provision of utility facilities to serve the proposed Project would not occur.

5.19.7 SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES
No Mitigation Measures are required.

5.19.8 SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
No significant environmental impacts occur with the proposed Project.

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-72

5.20 WILDFIRE

5.20.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The proposed PCL-1 alignment encompasses 711.28 acres in the western portion of the City’s SOI. The alignment runs south to north from the Cleveland National Forest to SR-91. The Relocation of PCL-1 is located on property known as B Canyon and is approximately 711.28 acres, and consists of the parcels that would be added to the MSHCP as Additional Reserve Lands.

Elevations of the proposed Project range from approximately 525 feet AMSL at SR-91(west of Fresno Road) in the north to approximately 2,100 AMSL in the south. The northern portion of the Project is topographically oriented north to south along ridgelines and canyons, while the southern portion crosses a series of steep east-west canyons and ridgelines.

The proposed Project alignment is comprised of undeveloped lands with dirt access roads, and heavily vegetated with coastal sage scrub, chaparral, non-native grasslands, coast live oak woodland, and riparian forest, including access roads and canyon routes. Wildland fuels in the form of native vegetation in the foothills cover the PCL-1 alignment.

The proposed PCL-1 alignment is located outside of the Corona Fire Department’s response area.

According to CAL FIRE and the City’s Safety Element, the Project area is within a State Responsibility Area (SRA) for wildfire and is designated as a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Area (FHSZ).

5.20.2 EXISTING REGULATIONS, PLANS, PROGRAMS, AND POLICIES Refer to the federal, State, regional, and local regulations previously referenced within Section

4.20.4 Wildfire prepared for the Modified Project.

5.20.3 PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES (PDF)
The proposed Project does not include PDFs.

5.20.4 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Based on the relevant CEQA Guidelines as currently implemented by the City of Corona, significant wildfire impacts would occur if the proposed Project or any Project-related component would:

Threshold FIRE-1 Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Threshold FIRE-2 Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-73
Threshold FIRE-3 Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary ongoing impacts to the environment?
Threshold FIRE-4 Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?

5.20.5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH PROPOSED PROJECT Impact FIRE-1: Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
No Impact. As previously stated, the Project alignment and the vicinity is located in a Very High FHSZ. The Project proposes no construction or development and would therefore not interfere with any public evacuation plans and would have no impact on police or fire services. The proposed Project would relocate a wildlife corridor and does not include any new development.

No new construction that would require closure of nearby roadways that might otherwise block or affect evacuation routes would occur. Therefore, the Project would not impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan and no impact would occur. No mitigation measures are required.

Impact FIRE-2: Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
No Impact. The proposed Project would relocate a wildlife corridor and does not include any development. Although the vacant undeveloped 711.28-acre Project alignment is withing a Very High FHSZ, the proposed Project would relocate a wildlife corridor and does not include any new development. The Project will not exacerbate wildfire risks, and will not expose project occupants or visitors to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire.

Thus, no impact would occur, and no mitigation measures are required.

Impact FIRE-3: Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary ongoing impacts to the environment?
No Impact. The proposed Project would relocate a wildlife corridor and does not include any development. The proposed relocation of the wildlife alignment does not require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1
PCL-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALSIS

ENPLANNERS
5-74
ongoing impacts to the environment. Thus, no impact would occur, and no mitigation measures are required.

IMPACT FIRE-4: Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
No Impact. The proposed Project would relocate wildlife corridor and does not include any development. The Project would not expose people or structures to any more risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post‐fire slope instability, or drainage changes, than is currently present within the Project area. Thus, no impact would occur, and no mitigation measures are required.

5.20.6 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The proposed Project would not result in new development and would not result in impacts directly or indirectly to an emergency response or evacuation plan and mitigation is not required. The nearest Fire Station is approximately a mile from the Project vicinity and would continue to adequately provide emergency services to the area. As discussed in Section 5.14, Public Services, the Project would not result in impacts on fire protection services. Thus, impacts would not occur and would not be cumulatively considerable.

5.20.7 SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES
No Mitigation Measures are required.

5.20.8 SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
No significant environmental impacts occur with the proposed Project.

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

ALTERNATIVES

ENPLANNERS
6-1

6.0 ALTERNATIVES

6.1 INTRODUCTION
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) include a discussion of reasonable project alternatives that would “feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any significant effects of the project and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives” (State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6[a]). As required by CEQA, this section identifies and evaluates potential alternatives to the Modified Project.

The proposed PCL-1 alignment analyzed in Section 5.0 would result in a superior wildlife corridor in comparison to the existing alignment. The PCL-1 alignment would: 1) result in a superior MSHCP Conservation Area configuration compared with the existing PCL-1 alignment; 2) result in an increase in conservation lands for the MSHCP Reserve, including an increase in native habitat types benefitting Covered Species; would indirectly benefit the existing Core Areas (A and B) by providing a less-constrained connection between the Core Areas; and support the goals of the MSHCP as it applies to linking the Cleveland National Forest to the Prado Basin, Santa Ana River, and the Chino Hills. In addition, the proposed PCL-1 alignment would not generate any environmental impacts and no mitigation measures are necessary.

In conclusion, the proposed PCL-1 alignment is an environmentally superior alternative and the need to conduct an Alternative analysis would be pointless and therefore not necessary. For these reasons, the following Alternatives analysis focuses on alternatives to the Modified Project described in Section 3.0 of this SEIR.

Section 15126.6 of the State CEQA Guidelines explains the foundation and legal requirements for the alternative’s analysis in an EIR. Key provisions are:
• The discussion of alternatives shall focus on alternatives to the Project or its location which are capable of avoiding or substantially lessening any significant effects of the Project, even if these alternatives would impede to some degree the attainment of the Project objectives or would be more costly.” (Section 15126.6[b]) • “The specific alternative of ‘no project’ shall also be evaluated along with its impact.” (Section 15126.6[e][1])
• “The no project analysis shall discuss the existing conditions at the time the notice of preparation is published, or if no notice of preparation is published, at the time environmental analysis is commenced, as well as what would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the project were not approved, based on current plans and consistent with available infrastructure and community services. If the environmentally superior alternative is the ‘no project’ alternative, the EIR shall also

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

ALTERNATIVES

ENPLANNERS
6-2
identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives.” (Section 15126.6[e][2])
• “The range of alternatives required in an EIR is governed by a ‘rule of reason’ that requires the EIR to set forth only those alternatives necessary to permit a reasoned choice. The alternatives shall be limited to ones that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project.” (Section 15126.6[f]) • “Among the factors that may be taken into account when addressing the feasibility of alternatives are site suitability, economic viability, availability of infrastructure, general plan consistency, other plans or regulatory limitations, jurisdictional boundaries…, and whether the proponent can reasonably acquire, control or otherwise have access to the alternative site (or the site is already owned by the proponent)” (Section 15126.6[f][1]).
• “Only locations that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project need be considered for inclusion in the EIR.” (Section 15126.6[f][2][A]) • “An EIR need not consider an alternative whose effect cannot be reasonably ascertained and whose implementation is remote and speculative.” (Section 15126.6[f][3]).

For each development alternative, this analysis:
• Describes the alternative.
• Analyzes the impact of the alternative as compared to the Project. • Identifies the impacts of the Project that would be avoided or lessened by the alternative.
• Assesses whether the alternative would meet most of the basic Project objectives. • Evaluates the comparative merits of the alternative and the Project.

According to Section 15126.6(d) of the State CEQA Guidelines, “if an alternative would cause…significant effects in addition to those that would be caused by the project as proposed, the significant effects of the alternative shall be discussed, but in less detail than the significant effects of the project as proposed.”

6.2 PROJECT OBJECTIVES
As described in Section 3.0, Project Description, the following objectives have been established for the Project and would aid decision makers in their review of the Project, the Project alternatives and associated environmental impacts. • To provide for the orderly and efficient development of the Green River Ranch property.

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

ALTERNATIVES

ENPLANNERS
6-3
• To implement the goals, objectives, and policies of the City of Corona General Plan. • To develop land uses which reflect sound economic, market, and financial consideration.
• To develop uses which will generate additional revenue for the City of Corona, and establish a strong tax base for the City.
• To provide convenient commercial and industrial services for the community, in addition to similar services for freeway oriented and generated visitors. • To promote organized and well-planned development within the Specific Plan area. • To provide guidance and direction for the future development of this property. • To create an aesthetically pleasing western gateway into the City of Corona.

6.3 2001 EIR ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
In the 2001 EIR, the following alternatives to the Approved Project were fully described and a qualitative analysis was provided for each environmental issue area evaluated in the 2001 EIR. The following development scenarios were identified as potential alternatives to implementation of the Approved Project. The following provides a summary of each alternative including determination of the Environmentally Superior Alternative as analyzed in the 2001 EIR.

6.3.1 2001 EIR Alternative 1: No Build Alternative
Under the No Build Alternative, the Approved Project site would remain in its existing condition. Under this Alternative, the 2001 EIR concluded that although the Project-related roadway improvements that would benefit existing and non-Project travel on Green River Road and access to and from Green River Road at the SR-91 ramps would no longer occur, impacts associated with the Approved Project would be avoided, especially the Approved Project’s significant and unavoidable impacts on air quality after mitigation.

Conclusion
The No Build Alternative would prohibit additional development, existing on-site uses would remain, and no further modification of topography or disturbance of existing biological, cultural, paleontological, or visual resources would be required. This Alternative would dramatically reduce the number of daily vehicle trips in the vicinity of the Project site, resulting in a corresponding reduction in construction and operational emissions, and noise. In addition, this Alternative was determined that it would neither alter existing geologic and hydrologic conditions nor require the implementation of mitigation to reduce potential impacts associated with these issues. Moreover, the 2001 EIR concluded the No Build Alternative would not

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

ALTERNATIVES

ENPLANNERS
6-4
achieve the stated objectives of the Green River Ranch Specific Plan. Thus, this Alternative was rejected in the 2001 EIR.

6.3.2 2001 EIR Alternative 2: No Project Alternative
Under the No Project Alternative, the Approved Project as proposed would not occur, nor the improvements to the SR-91 ramps at Green River Road or Green River Road along the Project frontage. Consequently, this was determined to eliminate the areawide benefit that these roadway improvements would provide for existing and non-project travel on Green River Road and access to and from Green River Road at the SR-91 ramps. This alternative would result in development under the existing underlying County zoning at the time in place resulting in the potential for scattered residential development over the bulk of the Approved Project property.

Conclusion
Under this Alternative, the 2001 EIR determined impacts related to land use, traffic, air quality, and noise would be reduced, while impacts related with public service/utilities and visual resources would increase. In addition, impacts related to biological, cultural and paleontological resources, geology and soils, and hydrology would be similar to those identified with the Approved Project.

This Alternative would not achieve the stated objectives of the Green River Ranch Specific Plan and would not provide the same level of infrastructure, such as roadway improvements to Green River Road. Thus, this Alternative was rejected in the 2001 EIR.

6.3.3 2001 EIR Alternative 3 - Commercial-Industrial Alternative Under this Alternative, development of residential uses in PA 6 would not be implemented and development of approximately 520,900 square feet of mixed (commercial and industrial) uses and 150 hotel rooms would continue under this Alternative in the same manner as the Approved Project.

Conclusion
The scale and intensity of commercial-industrial development under this Alternative would be similar to that detailed for the Approve Project. The elimination of 32 residential units would incrementally reduce traffic, air quality, noise, and geologic impacts, and significantly reduce impacts related to the provision of public services and utilities. Furthermore, impacts related to all other issues would be similar to those identified with the Approved Project.

Under the Commercial-Industrial Alternative, the Project site would be developed with the same intensity of commercial and industrial uses in PAs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 7 while PA 6 would remain undeveloped, and this Alternative would achieve the stated objectives of the Green River Ranch Specific Plan. This Alternative was considered as an Environmentally Superior Alternative in the 2001 EIR.

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

ALTERNATIVES

ENPLANNERS
6-5

6.3.4 2001 EIR Alternative 4 - Residential
Under this Alternative, the 167.8-acre Project site would be developed with residential uses.

This Alternative would develop PA 6 as stated in the Specific Plan with 32 single-family residential units on lots minimally sized at 3.0 acres each, while the northern 69.6 acres of the Project site would be developed with single-family residential units at a density of 2 dwelling units per acre, resulting in 139 dwellings. Thus, implementation of this Alternative would result in the development of 171 single-family dwelling units on the 167.8-acre project site.

Conclusion
The 2001 EIR determined impacts related to traffic and air quality would be reduced, while impacts related to noise, public service/utilities and visual resources would increase; however, impacts related to other issues would be similar to those identified with the Approved Project.

In addition, under the Residential Alternative, the Project site would be developed with singlefamily dwelling units, therefore this Alternative was determined to not achieve the stated objectives of the Green River Ranch Specific Plan. Thus, this Alternative was rejected in the 2001 EIR.

6.3.5 2001 EIR Environmentally Superior Alternative
The No Build Alternative was the Environmentally Superior Alternative since no development would occur on the Project site; however it would not achieve the approved GRRSP objectives.

Thus, this Alternative would not result in traffic, air quality, or noise impacts, nor would this Alternative disturb the current on-site biological, cultural, paleontological condition of the site, or alter existing on-site topography and drainage.

In accordance with CEQA (Section 15126(d)(4), if a “No Build” Alternative is selected as the Environmentally Superior Alternative, another must be selected from the remaining alternatives. The 2001 EIR identified the Commercial-Industrial Alternative as the Environmentally Superior Alternative. Although the Commercial-Industrial Alternative would only incrementally reduce average daily trips and the amount of mobile source emissions, air pollution emissions, and associated impacts to transportation facilities and air quality, this Alternative would not generate noise or public service/utility impacts. In addition, this Alternative would also achieve the basic objectives of the Approved Project. Based on the preceding analysis as summarized in the 2001 EIR, the 2001 EIR identified the CommercialIndustrial Alternative as the Environmentally Superior Alternative. However, the City found that although the Commercial-Industrial Alternative was considered environmentally superior to the proposed Project, it was determined to be infeasible because it failed to meet all Project objectives.

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

ALTERNATIVES

ENPLANNERS
6-6

6.4 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED IN THIS SEIR
As stated above, the analysis of alternatives from the 2001 EIR is part of the “range of reasonable alternatives” to be considered per State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(a). In addition to the alternatives evaluated under the 2001 EIR, the following alternatives are evaluated in this Draft SEIR:
• Alternative 1: No Project/No Build Alternative: Under this Alternative, the undeveloped site would remain vacant and unoccupied.
• Alternative 2: Mixed Use Alternative: Under this Alternative, PA 1 through 5 and PA 7 would be developed for mixed (commercial and industrial) use purposes only per the existing GRRSP design guidelines. This Alternative would require a specific plan amendment.
• Alternative 3: Residential Alternative: Under this Alternative, development of the Project site would be residential uses only per the existing GRRSP. PA 6 would be developed as stated in the Specific Plan with 32 single-family residential units on lots minimally sized at 3.0 acres each. The northern portion of the Project site would be developed with single-family residential units at a density of 2 dwelling units per acre, resulting in 139 dwellings. Thus, implementation of this Alternative would result in the development of 171 single-family dwelling units on the Project site.

Further details on these alternatives, and an evaluation of environmental effects relative to the Modified Project, are provided below. The analysis of these alternatives adds to the overall range of alternatives considered for the Modified Project as well as satisfying the State CEQA Guidelines requirements that the “no project” alternative be considered (CCR Section 15126.6[e]). The Modified Project itself is an Alternative approach to implementing the Approved Project and the analysis of environmental effects provided in Section 4.0 of which provides a detailed comparison of impacts under this “Modified” vs. the Approved Project in 2001. Therefore, the analysis of the Modified Project provided in Section 4 of this SEIR can be considered part of the overall evaluation of alternatives for the Approved Project.

6.4.1 Alternative 1 – No Project/No Build Alternative
Description
Under the No Build Alternative, the Project site would remain in its existing condition.

Potential impacts associated with the Modified Project would be avoided.

Under this Alternative, however, the Modified Project offer to widen Green River Road to a full six lane section along the Project frontage would not be provided. These Project- related roadway improvements would benefit existing and non-Project travel on Green River Road and access to and from Green River Road at the SR-91 ramps.

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

ALTERNATIVES

ENPLANNERS
6-7
Environmental Considerations
Continuation of the site as vacant and unoccupied would result in all environmental impacts being less than the Modified Project. There would be no changes to any of the existing conditions and there would be no impact to each of the 20 CEQA Checklist evaluation topics.

The No Project/No Build Alternative by definition would not meet the objectives of the Modified Project that were discussed earlier in this chapter.

Conclusion
The No Project/No Build Alternative would result in no development on the Project site. The existing vacant on-site setting would remain. No further modification of topography or disturbance of existing biological, cultural, paleontological, or visual resources would be required. This Alternative would dramatically reduce the number of daily vehicle trips in the vicinity of the Project site, resulting in a corresponding reduction in construction and operational emissions, and noise. This Alternative would neither alter existing geologic and hydrologic conditions nor require the implementation of mitigation to reduce potential impacts associated with these issues. The No Project/No Build Alternative by definition would not meet the objectives of the Modified Project that were discussed earlier in this chapter. Therefore, this Alternative is rejected.

6.4.2 Alternative 2 – Mixed Use Alternative
Description
Under the Mixed Use Alternative, PA 1 through 5 and PA 7 would be developed for mixed (commercial and industrial) use purposes only per the existing GRRSP design guidelines.

Similar to the Modified Project, this Alternative would develop all but the 98.2 acres of residential uses per the existing GRRSP. Because PA 1 (16.7 acres), PA 2 (10 acres), and PA 7 (4.8 acres) are zoned for commercial-industrial uses, a Specific Plan Amendment would be required to change the existing land uses within PA 3 Commercial-General (2.9 acres), PA 4 Commercial-General (2.1 acres), and PA 5 Hotel/Mixed Use Office (5.8 acres) to Mixed Use.

This Alternative would allow development of 42.3 acres according to the relevant policies stated in the GRRSP. Therefore, the industrial use acreage is reduced by approximately 7.22 acres when compared to the Modified Project’s 49.31 acres of BPI.

Environmental Considerations
As previously mentioned, this Alternative would create a less intensive industrial design when compared to the Modified Project, thereby would likely reduce impacts related to air quality, energy, greenhouse gas emission, noise, and transportation. While most of the environmental issues associated with this Alternative would be similar to those of the Modified Project, this Alternative does likely increase impacts to the following areas:

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

ALTERNATIVES

ENPLANNERS
6-8
• Aesthetics: This Alternative would maintain residential development within 98.2-acre PA 6, thereby eliminating the proposed 83.34 acres of Open Space. Although PA 6 would be designed and built according to the GRRSP guidelines, this Alternative would significantly change the hillsides that is part of the western gateway into the City of Corona. The impacts to aesthetics would be increased.
• Biological Resources: As previously stated, this Alternative would maintain residential development within PA 6. As such, the potential residential development throughout the 98.2 acres would result in an increased potential to impact observed and unknown biological resources during construction. In addition, this Alternative would permanently eliminate the proposed 83.34 acres of Open Space designated for the MSHCP of which would support the local biological habitat. The impacts to biological resources would be increased.
• Cultural Resources / Paleontological Resources / Tribal Cultural Resources: As previously stated, this Alternative would maintain residential development within PA

6. As such, the potential residential development throughout the 98.2 acres would result in an increased potential to uncover unknown resources during construction activities.

Due to the increased acreage in development, impacts to unknown sensitive resources would be increased.
• Wildfire: As previously stated, this Alternative would maintain residential development within PA 6. As such, the potential residential development throughout the 98.2 acres would result in an increased potential to expose people or structures to the risk of wildfire. Because this Alternative eliminates the proposed PA 5 Estate Residential in a more confined 20.39 acres, development of this Alternative would extend further up the hillside and into the National Forest where there is an increase in risk wildfire. Although this Alternative would be designed built with the appropriate fire design elements and approved by the Corona Fire Department, impacts to Wildfire would increase.

Conclusion
The GRRSP establishes objectives that will guide development of the Project site. These objectives include providing for the efficient and orderly development of the Project site; developing land uses which reflect sound economic, market, and financial considerations; developing uses that will generate revenue for the City of Corona; and providing convenient commercial and industrial services for the local and regional consumers. Under the Mixed Use Alternative, the Project site would be developed with less intensity of commercial and industrial uses in PAs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 7 while PA 6 would remain undeveloped for residential uses. This Alternative would achieve the stated objectives of the existing GRRSP, however it would not meet all the basic goals of the proposed GRRSP (i.e., Modified Project).

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

ALTERNATIVES

ENPLANNERS
6-9

6.4.3 Alternative 3 – Residential Alternative
Description
Under this Alternative, the 160-acre Project site would be developed with residential uses and maintain the proposed Open Space. PA 5 would be developed as stated in the proposed GRRSPA with 32 single-family residential units, similar to the approved GRRSP. The northern

55.02 acres within the proposed PA 1 through 4 of the Project site would be developed with single-family residential units at a density of 2 dwelling units per acre, resulting in 110 dwellings. The 83.34 acres of PA 6 would maintain the proposed designated Open Space. Thus, implementation of this Alternative would result in the development of 142 single-family dwelling units within 76.85 acres and designate 83.34 acres Open Space within the 160-acre Project site.

Environmental Considerations
As previously stated, this Alternative would designate a majority of the site to open space and develop all the proposed industrial uses of the Modified Project with residential. Therefore, this Alternative would likely reduce impacts with the following environmental issues:
• Air Quality / Greenhouse Gases / Transportation: It is estimated the Modified Project will generate 4,370 two-way average daily trips, 429 A.M. peak hour trips, and 386 P.M. peak hour trips. Based on generation factors included in Trip Generation, 6th Edition, this Alternative would generate 1,339 average daily trips, 99 A.M. peak trips, and 134 P.M. peak trips. This represents a reduction of 65, 71, and 61 percent (respectively) in the number of ADT, A.M. peak trips, and P.M. peak trips. Such a decrease in traffic volumes would be anticipated to substantially reduce traffic related impacts from those identified with the Modified Project.

As a result of the reduced traffic related impacts, it is likely that the fewer number of vehicle trips would generate less air quality and greenhouse gas impacts. Therefore, impacts to air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, and transportation are reduced. • Noise: Because this Alternative envisions development of the Project site with residential uses only, noise impacts resulting from parking areas, loading docks, manufacturing processes, drive-through, and other sources are not anticipated.

Although short-term noise impacts are anticipated during construction of residential units, but the duration, intensity, and extent of this noise is not anticipated to be significant. It should be noted, the residential uses on the north side of the site adjacent to SR-91 would be designed with features to mitigate the freeway noise to less than significant levels. Impacts related to noise would be reduced.

Although this Alternative would reduce such environmental issues when compared to those of the Modified Project, this Alternative does likely increase impacts to the following areas:

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

ALTERNATIVES

ENPLANNERS
6-10
• Population / Public Services / Utilities and Service Systems: This Alternative will result in the development of 142 single-family residential units. Based on an average of 3.42 persons per dwelling unit (Department of Finance), development of the Project site under this Alternative would result in a population increase of approximately 486 persons. This population increase would increase demand on sewer, water supplies, solid waste facilities, and school facilities. Impacts related to public services and utilities and service system requirements for this Alternative would increase.

Conclusion
Under this Alternative, impacts related to air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, and transportation would be reduced, while impacts related to public services, utilities and service systems would increase. Impacts related to other issues would be similar to those identified with the Modified project.

The GRRSP establishes objectives that will guide development of the Project site. These objectives include providing for the efficient and orderly development of the Project site; developing land uses which reflect sound economic, market, and financial considerations; developing uses that will generate revenue for the City of Corona; and providing convenient commercial and industrial services for the local and regional consumers. Under this Alternative, the Project site would be developed with single-family dwelling units and designated open space. This Alternative would not achieve the basic stated objectives of the Green River Ranch Specific Plan and is, therefore, rejected.

6.5 SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVES
Table 6.5-1 is a generalized comparative assessment of potential environmental impacts of the Alternatives as compared to the Modified Project.

Table 6.5-1 - Comparison of the Project Alternatives
Environmental
Issues
No Project/No Build
Alternative
Mixed Use
Alternative
Residential
Alternative
Aesthetics Reduced Increased Equal
Agricultural & Forest
Resources Similar Similar Similar
Air Quality Reduced Reduced Reduced
Biological Resources Reduced Increased Similar
Cultural Resources Reduced Increased Similar
Energy Reduced Reduced Reduced
Geology / Soils Reduced Similar Similar
Greenhouse Gas
Emissions Reduced Reduced Reduced

D R A F T S U B S E Q U E N T E I R

G R E E N R I V E R R A N C H S P A & B U S I N E S S P A R K

I N D U S T R I A L D E V E L O P M E N T A N D
R E L O C A T I O N O F P C L- 1

C I T Y O F C O R O N A
S E P T E M B E R 202 4

ALTERNATIVES

ENPLANNERS
6-11
Hazards & Hazardous
Materials Reduced Similar Similar
Hydrology / Water
Quality Reduced Similar Similar
Land Use and
Planning Reduced Similar Similar
Minerals Reduced Similar Similar
Noise Reduced Reduced Reduced
Population and
Housing Reduced Similar Increased
Public Services Reduced Similar Increased
Recreation Reduced Similar Increased
Transportation Reduced Reduced Reduced
Tribal Cultural
Resources
Reduced Increased Similar
Utilities / Service
Systems Reduced Reduced Increased
Wildfire Reduced Increased Similar
For comparison, Table 6.5-2 provides a generalized comparative assessment of potential environmental impacts of the Approved Project vs. the Modified Project.

Table 6.5-2 - Comparison of the Approved Project vs. Modified Project Environmental Issues
Approved Project
Significance
Modified Project
Comparison
Aesthetics Less than Significant with
Mitigation Similar
Agricultural & Forest Resources Less than Significant Similar Air Quality Significant and Unavoidable
after Mitigation Similar
Biological Resources Significant and Unavoidable
after Mitigation Reduced
Cultural Resources Less than Significant Similar
Energy Reduced Similar
Geology / Soils Less than Significant with
Mitigation Similar
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Not Addressed New Impact
Hazards & Hazardous Materials Less than Significant Similar Hydrology / Water Quality Less than Significant with
Mitigation Similar
Land Use and Planning Less than Significant Similar
Minerals Reduced Similar

C I T Y O F C O R O N A
S E P T E M B E R 202 4

D R A F T S U B S E Q U E N T E I R

G R E E N R I V E R R A N C H S P A & B U S I N E S S P A R K

I N D U S T R I A L D E V E L O P M E N T A N D
R E L O C A T I O N O F P C L- 1

ALTERNATIVES

ENPLANNERS
6-12
Noise Significant and Unavoidable
after Mitigation Reduced
Population and Housing Less than Significant Similar
Public Services Less than Significant Similar
Recreation Less than Significant Similar
Transportation Significant and Unavoidable
after Mitigation Similar
Tribal Cultural Resources Less than Significant New Impact Utilities / Service Systems Less than Significant Similar Wildfire Less than Significant with
Mitigation Similar

6.6 ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE
The No Build / No Project Alternative is the Environmentally Superior Alternative since no development would occur on the Project site. Unlike the Modified Project or the Project Alternatives 2 thru 3, the No Build / No Project Alternative would not result in traffic, air quality, or noise impacts, nor would this Alternative disturb the current on-site biological, cultural, paleontological condition of the site, or alter existing on-site topography and drainage.

As required by CEQA (Section 15126(d)(4), if a “No Build” Alternative is selected as the environmentally superior alternative, the EIR shall also identify an Environmentally Superior Alternative among the other Alternatives.

While both the No Build / No Project and Residential Alternative reduce traffic and air quality impacts, the reduction in daily vehicle trips (and, therefore, the generation of mobile-source emissions), each generated impacts to population and housing, public services, and utilities and service systems in excess of that identified with the Modified Project. In addition, the Residential Alternative would permit the construction and occupation of residential uses adjacent to Green River Road and SR-91, which would result in the exposure of sensitive uses (residential dwellings) to traffic noise generated on these roadways. However, such impacts would be reduced with implementation of appropriate Project Design Features and/or mitigation. Furthermore, neither of the two Alternatives fully implement the Project Objects as stated in the GRRSP or the Modified Project as previously stated. Therefore, these two alternatives are rejected as environmentally superior to the proposed project.

The Mixed Use Alternative only incrementally reduces average daily trips and thereby reducing air quality and greenhouse gas emission impacts. In addition, due to the Alternatives less dense industrial design, generate noise impacts to nearby sensitive receptors would be reduced. The GRRSP establishes objectives that will guide development of the Project site.

This Alternative would achieve the stated objectives of the GRRSP and the Project Objectives.

Based on the preceding analysis, Alternative 2, Mixed Use Alternative has been selected as the

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

ALTERNATIVES

ENPLANNERS
6-13
This Alternative would achieve the stated objectives of the GRRSP and the Project Objectives.

Based on the preceding analysis, Alternative 2, Mixed Use Alternative has been selected as the Environmentally Superior Alternative. However, under current state zoning laws, the City cannot approve projects that would result in fewer residences than under existing conditions and therefore this Alternative is rejected from consideration.

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

ALTERNATIVES

ENPLANNERS
6-14
This Page Intentionally Left Blank

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

OTHER CEQA-REQUIRED ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
7-1

7.0 OTHER CEQA-REQUIRED ANALYSIS
This section of the Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (Draft SEIR) provides a discussion of additional CEQA impact considerations, including Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes, Growth- Inducing Impacts, and any Mandatory Findings of Significance.

7.1 CEQA REQUIREMENTS
Section 15126.2 (b) of the CEQA Guidelines requires that an EIR discuss any significant impacts associated with the Modified Project. In Section 4.0, Environmental Impact Analysis, of this Draft SEIR, describes the potential environmental impacts of the Modified Project and recommends mitigation measures to reduce impacts to a less than significant level, where feasible. Section 1.0, Executive Summary, which summarizes the impacts, mitigation measures, and levels of significance before and after mitigation.

7.2 SIGNIFICANT AND IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES
The CEQA Guidelines §15126.2(d), requires a discussion of any significant irreversible environmental changes that would be caused by a proposed project. Generally, the section states that a project would result in significant irreversible environmental changes if the following occurs:
• The project would involve a large commitment of nonrenewable resources in a way that would make their nonuse or removal unlikely;
• The primary and secondary impacts would generally commit future generations to similar uses;
• The project would involve uses in which irreversible damage could result from any potential environmental accidents associated with the project; and • The proposed consumption of resources is not justified (e.g., the project involved the wasteful use of energy).

The Modified Project would NOT involve a large commitment of nonrenewable resources in a way that would make their nonuse or removal unlikely.

The Modified Project would not involve the utilization of nonrenewable resources in a manner that would make their nonuse or removal unlikely. Nonrenewable resources associated with the development of the Modified Project site would include fossil fuels. Fossil fuels would serve as energy sources during both construction and operations of the Modified Project. Fossil fuels would act as transportation energy sources for construction vehicles and heavy equipment during the construction period and by vehicles and equipment used during project operations.

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

OTHER CEQA-REQUIRED ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
7-2
Though the Modified Project would endeavor to utilize fossil fuels efficiently, their use would be vital for construction and operations activities, making their nonuse unlikely. However, the Modified Project would not require the continued use of fossil fuels at the end of its operational life. By nature of being a nonrenewable resource, fossil fuels, once consumed, cannot be replaced. Those fuels, once spent, may be transformed into another form of matter such as exhaust or smoke. Standard vehicles and equipment used by the Modified Project in both construction and operational phases would likely utilize fossil fuels. Some construction and operational equipment such as forklifts may be electrified and therefore not rely on fossil fuels.

Energy-efficient equipment would be utilized according to their availability and in order to comply with energy regulations and policies for the Modified Project as a whole as it pertains to residential, office, hospitality, and commercial uses.

The Modified Project proposes the potential development of a fueling station; however such operations are highly regulated and would not likely store significant amounts of fossil fuels.

Fossil fuels on-site would be stored in a manner that would make their removal unlikely. No infrastructure is proposed to store fossil fuels in large amounts or without the ability of removal. The Modified Project would also require the commitment of land on which the Modified Project would be developed for a mixed-use of residential, office, hospitality, and commercial uses. Similarly, land is a finite resource in that once developed and in active use it removes the ability for that land to be used for other purposes. However, development of the Modified Project site would not eliminate the possibility of redevelopment in the future. a) The primary and secondary impacts would generally commit future generations to similar uses.

Impacts associated with the Modified Project are largely less than significant with mitigation applied. The majority of identified impacts, not adequately covered by the previous EIR, were anticipated to create a less than significant impact or no impact, with the exception of air quality and greenhouse gas emissions.

Once development of the proposed Modified Project occurs, it would not be feasible to return the developed land to its existing (pre-project) condition. In addition, the redevelopment is proposed with the intent to last a long time. However, because the project site is already developed with urban uses, redevelopment under the Modified Project would not represent a substantial change in land use.

The Modified Project’s development is anticipated to produce significant and unavoidable impacts based on analyses conducted in Section 4.3, Air Quality and Section 4.17, Transportation. These impacts would also affect the surrounding environment.

The use of materials considered hazardous waste would be minimal; mostly used for cleaning, landscaping, and operational maintenance. Compliance with federal, state, and local regulations would ensure that the usage and storage of any hazardous materials and waste

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

OTHER CEQA-REQUIRED ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
7-3
would be completed in the safest and most efficient manner. Similarly, the Modified Project would comply with any federal, state, and local air quality and water quality regulations to further ensure the least amount of environmental impact. The mixed-use nature of the Modified Project is unlikely to lead to impacts that would commit future generations and developments to similar uses. Therefore, the Modified Project would not influence future development in that land area as the existing land use designations would be unchanged. b) The project would NOT involve uses in which irreversible damage could result from any potential environmental accidents associated with the project.

The Modified Project is intended to develop warehouse, commercial, hospitality, office and residential facilities and is not anticipated to release hazardous material into the environment.

Construction and operation of the Modified Project would utilize chemical substances common with typical construction, landscaping, and cleaning activities and do not generally pose a significant hazard to the public or environment. However, in the event that hazardous materials are either used or stored on the project site, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OHSA) requirements would both reduce the significance of any impacts and ensure the Modified Project’s compliance with any Federal, State, and local policy regarding hazardous materials and accidents. c) The proposed consumption of resources is justified (e.g., the project does NOT involve the wasteful use of energy).

The Modified Project would comply with any applicable federal, state, and local regulations and laws regarding the use of resources during both construction and operations. As established in Section 4.8, Utilities and Service Systems, development of the Modified Project would not significantly impact water, electricity, solid waste, and telecommunications resources. It was found that the Easter Municipal Water District (EMWD), the water supplier for the City and project site, is able to meet the Modified Project’s expanded demand. Further, development of the Modified Project would include the use of energy-efficient design and materials in accordance with the most recent Federal, State, and local regulations. Therefore, resources used for the Modified Project, including energy, would be done in an efficient, justifiable manner.

7.3 GROWTH INDUCING IMPACTS
State CEQA Guidelines §15126.2(e) requires that EIRs include a discussion of ways in which a project could induce growth. The State CEQA Guidelines identify a project as “growthinducing” if it fosters economic or population growth or if it encourages the construction of additional housing either directly or indirectly in the surrounding environment. New employees from commercial or industrial development and new population from residential development represent direct forms of growth. These direct forms of growth have a secondary effect of expanding the size of local markets and inducing additional economic activity in the

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

OTHER CEQA-REQUIRED ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
7-4
area. The proposed Modified Project would therefore have a growth inducing impact if it would:
• Directly or indirectly foster economic or population growth, or the construction of additional housing;
• Remove obstacles to population growth;
• Require the construction of new or expanded facilities that could cause significant environmental
• effects; or
• Encourage and facilitate other activities that could significantly affect the environment, either individually or cumulatively.

A project’s potential to induce growth does not automatically result in growth. Growth can only happen through capital investment in new economic opportunities by the private or public sectors. Under CEQA, the potential for growth inducement is not considered necessarily detrimental nor necessarily beneficial, and neither is it automatically considered to be of little significance to the environment. This issue is presented to provide additional information on ways in which the Modified Project could contribute to significant changes in the environment, beyond the direct consequences of implementing the Modified Project examined in the preceding sections of this Draft SEIR.

Direct Growth-Inducing Impacts in the Surrounding Environment Growth inducement can be defined as the relationship between a project and growth within the surrounding area. This relationship is often difficult to establish with any degree of precision and cannot be measured on a numerical scale because there are many social, economic, and political factors associated with the rate and location of development. Accordingly, the CEQA Guidelines instruct that an EIR should focus on the way’s growth might be induced. This relationship is sometimes looked at as either one of facilitating planned growth or inducing unplanned growth. Both types of growth, however, should be evaluated. Potential growthinducing effects are examined through analysis of the following questions:

1. Would the project directly or indirectly foster economic or population growth, or the construction of additional housing?
NO. The Modified Project, when implemented, would directly induce population growth in the City through the development of 32 new dwelling units and commercial uses. The Modified Project would result in a similar level of development intensity as the Approved Project.

Although the Modified Project would directly and indirectly induce economic and population growth, this growth is consistent with the City’s local plans including the existing GRRSP as well as regional planning documents and is therefore not considered a significant impact.

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

OTHER CEQA-REQUIRED ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
7-5

2. Would the project remove obstacles to population growth? NO. The Modified Project is located at the edge of the City’s limits, and adjacent to US National Forest land and unincorporated areas of Riverside County with limited development potential.

Development of the Modified Project would not complete infrastructure gaps that impede development. For these reasons, the Modified Project would not remove an impediment to growth.

3. Would the project require the construction of new or expanded facilities that could cause significant environmental effects?
NO. As discussed in Draft SEIR Section 4.19, Utilities and Service Systems, the construction of utilities to the Modified Project site would result in a less than significant impact on the environment. The Modified Project is not anticipated to require new or expanded off-site facilities that would result in significant environmental impacts.

4. Would the project encourage and facilitate other activities that could significantly affect the environment, either individually or cumulatively? NO. Refer to Sections 4.1 through Section 4.20 of this Draft SEIR, which discusses reasonably foreseeable potential impacts of the Modified Project during construction and operation.

7.4 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
CEQA requires preparation of an EIR when certain specified impacts may result from construction or implementation of a project. An SEIR has been prepared for the Modified Project, which addresses the Mandatory Findings of Significance within Sections 4.1 through Section 4.20 including degradation of the environment, impacts to habitats or species, shortterm vs. long-term goals, cumulatively considerable impacts, and substantial adverse effects on human beings.

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

OTHER CEQA-REQUIRED ANALYSIS

ENPLANNERS
7-6
This Page Intentionally Left Blank

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

REFERENCES

ENPLANNERS
8-1

8.0 REFERENCES
California Air Resources Board (CARB). Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Perspective (2005). Available at:
http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/defaultsource/ ceqa/handbook/california-air-resourcesboard-air-quality-and-land-usehandbook-a-community-health-perspective.pdf.

Accessed July 2023.

California Air Resources Board (CARB). Cap and Trade Overview. California Air Resources Board (2015).

California Air Resources Board (CARB). California's 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan (2017).

California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality (2022).

California Building Standards Commission. 2022 California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen), Part 11, Title 24 (2023). Available at:
https://www.dgs.ca.gov/BSC/CALGreen. Accessed July 2023.

California Department of Conservation (DOC). California Important Farmland Finder (2022). Available at: https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/ciff/. Accessed May 2023.

California Department of Finance. E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, January 2021-2023, with 2020 Benchmark (2023). Available at: https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/estimates/e-5- population-andhousing-estimates-for-cities-counties-and-the-state-2020-2024/. Accessed June 2023.

California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). Corona – Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA (n.d.). Available at: https://34c031f8-c9fd-4018- 8c5a-4159cdff6b0d-cdn-endpoint.azureedge.net/-/media/osfm-website/what-wedo/community-wildfire-preparedness-and-mitigation/fire-hazard-severity-zones/firehazard-severity-zones-map/upload1/corona.pdf?rev=1ec85f7d5f46442bb5b065da1b37539a&hash=8FDDA637553D7B 5119CDBE6014623E24. Accessed May 2022.

California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). Disposal Rate Calculator – Corona 2022. (2022). Available at:
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/LGCentral/AnnualReporting/DisposalRateCalculator.

Accessed May 2023.

California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details. El Sobrante Landfill (2023). Available at:

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

REFERENCES

ENPLANNERS
8-2
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/2280?siteID=2402.

Accessed June 2023.

California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details. Olinda Alpha Landfill (2023). Available at:
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/2757?siteID=2093.

Accessed June 2023.

California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). Scenic Highway, State Scenic Highway Map (2019). Available at: https://dot.ca.gov/programs/design/lap-landscapearchitecture-and-community-livability/lap-liv-i-scenic-highways. Accessed May 2023.

California Energy Commission. Building Energy Efficiency Standards (n.d.). Available at:
https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/programs/building-energyefficiencystandards. Accessed July 2023.

California Energy Commission. Appliance Efficiency Regulations-Title 20 (2023). Available at: https://www.energy.ca.gov/rules-and-regulations/appliance-efficiencyregulationstitle-20 Accessed July 2023.

California Energy Commission. Energy Commission Adopts Updated Building Standards to Improve Efficiency, Reduce Emissions From Homes and Businesses (2021). Available at: https://www.energy.ca.gov/news/2021-08/energycommission-adopts-updatedbuilding-standards-improve-efficiency-reduce. Accessed July 2023.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Criteria Air Pollutants (2023). Available at:
https://www.epa.gov/criteria-air-pollutants. Accessed July 2023.

California Geologic Survey (CGS). California Earthquake Hazards Zone Application, Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation (2021). Available at:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/EQZApp/app/. Accessed June 2023.

California State Water Resources Control Board. Geotracker (2019). Available at:
https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/map/?CMD=runreport&myaddress=corona.

Accessed June 2022.

City of Corona. City of Corona, Climate Action Plan Update (2019). Available at:
https://www.coronaca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/18422/6372393539620700

00. Accessed August 2023.

City of Corona. Corona General Plan Technical Update for the City of Corona, Draft Environmental Impact Report (2019). Available at:
https://www.coronaca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/17290/6371227991571000

00. Accessed June 2023.

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

REFERENCES

ENPLANNERS
8-3
City of Corona. City of City of Corona 2020 – 2040 General Plan (2020). Available at:
https://www.coronaca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/17292/6373966484359700

00. Accessed June 2023.

City of Corona. City of Corona 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (2021). Available at:
https://www.coronaca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/20292/6376124027134000

00. Accessed April 2023.

City of Corona. 2023. Corona, California, Municipal Code (2023). Available at:
https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/corona/latest/corona_ca/0-0-0- 33686.

Accessed June 2023.

Corona Fire Department (CFD). Corona Fire Department 2021 Annual Report (2021).

Available at:
https://www.coronaca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/21776/6378416616372000

00. Accessed June 2023.

Corona Police Department (CPD). Corona Police Department 2022 Annual Report (2022).

Available at:
https://www.coronaca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/23662/6381395416577700

00. Accessed May 2023.

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). FEMA Flood Map Service Center. Map 06065C0668G, 06065C0669G, 06065C1335G (2023). Available at:
https://msc.fema.gov/portal/home. Accessed June 2023.

Google, Inc. 2024. Google Earth Pro version 7.3.6.9796. Build date 02/22/2024. Accessed June 2024.

Riverside Transit Agency (RTA). Maps and Schedules (2024). Available at:
https://www.riversidetransit.com/index.php/route-info. Accessed June 2023.

South Coast Air Quality Management District. Significance Thresholds and Analysis (2022).

Available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/home/rules-compliance/ceqa/air-quality-analysishandbook. Accessed August 2023.

Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). Connect SoCal, A Plan for Navigating a Brighter Future (2024). Available at:
https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-attachments/23-2987-connect-socal-2024- final-complete-040424.pdf?1714175547. Accessed May 2024.

Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/ Sustainable Communities Strategy (2020). Available at:
https://www.connectsocal.org/Pages/Connect-SoCal-Final-Plan.aspx. Accessed May 2023.

CITY OF CORONA
SEPTEMBER 202 4

DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR

GREEN RIVER RANCH SPA & BUSINESS PARK

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
RELOCATION OF PCL - 1

REFERENCES

ENPLANNERS
8-4
United States Forest Service (USFS). Wildlife Hazard Potential, Version 2020 Classified (2020). Available at:
https://usfs.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?useExisting=1&layers=552 26e8547f84a ae8965210a9801c357. Accessed May 2023.

Ms. Sandra Vanian
City of Corona Planning & Development Department
400 South Vincentia Ave
Corona, CA 92882
Dear Sandra and Corona City Council Members
Re: Subsequent Draft Environmental Impact Report October 11, 2024, Green River Ranch Specific Plan
As Board Members of the Montenero Community Association a residential community of 241 homes immediately adjacent to The Green River Ranch Specific plan, we strongly object to the amendments & rezoning described in the City’s Notice of Hearing planned for November 25, 2024 including GPA 2020-002, SPA 2020-006, TTM 37963, and PP 2020-004.

While we acknowledge that private developers and landowners enjoy the right to develop their property and enjoy profit from doing the same, the revisions and rezoning requested to the original plan approved back in 2001 is radically different from the 2024 plan which will have severe and irreversible environmental impact on our collective environment & transportation. This has been stated and clarified in subsequent conversations with you.

While your hearing notice indicated that it was distributed to residents within 500 feet of the project area, this notification, while being the absolute minimum requirement, does not take into account other Homeowners Associations and communities in our area which will be impacted by the traffic flow which is already at a critical stage and had they been notified, would likely want to weigh in on this project plan. Further, it is somewhat misleading to characterize an auto trip as equivalent to that of an 18-wheeler carrying freight.

The Green River Ranch Project area is unique in that there is no additional access for commuters from Chino, Riverside, South Corona, and in fact, any commuters traveling on the 91 freeway to Orange County or Los Angeles because of the unique topography including the mountains, river, Prado Dam and the railroad. In fact, there is probably no other locale that presents so many traffic chokepoints.

As you know, Gavin Newsom recently signed AB98 into law which restricts Industrial developments of this type so close to homes, and he did that for a reason. While this project could “ fall under the radar” because of the deadlines for the enforcement of the new provisions of AB98, it doesn’t mean you should approve this rezoning; particularly since you already aware of the state’s intent. Also, the State of California is intent on building more homes, which would certainly be better than an industrial warehouse project with 18 wheelers in our community..

It seems it would be most prudent for all involved for City Council to deny this particular rezoning application and perhaps revert to a project with a smaller footprint or a project that actually benefits the City of Corona and is a true gateway into our city. As I remember most of the community was not opposed to restaurants, a hotel, and boutique gift shops and homes which would benefit us vs creating such an adverse environmental impact.

By supporting this project, it seemed like the city was mostly interested in job creation, but it also seems that most of the potential “prospects” for utilizing this industrial space are already here in the City of Corona anyway , which would not create many “net/new” jobs here , but would create a miasma of environmental and traffic issues.

We are available for discussion at your convenience.

Paul Ramlo, President
Mike Serle, Vice President
Wael Elatar, Treasurer
Martha Domingues, Secretary
Jon Hettinger, Member at Large
From: Sandra Vanian
To: Paul Ramlo
Cc: Joanne Coletta; Jim Steiner
Subject: RE: FW: Green River horse property development Date: Wednesday, November 6, 2024 11:29:00 AM
Attachments: image001.png
image002.png
image003.png
image004.png
Mr. Ramlo,
CEQA recognizes that not all projects will adhere to certain thresholds, therefore, it allows a city under an EIR to override unavoidable environmental impacts. The developer is still responsible for implementing the mitigation measures disclosed in the EIR even though it will not fully reduce certain impacts to less than significant. The city can still approve the project as proposed or request certain modifications if the city determines that the proposed revisions would be better than the original proposal. The city can also evaluate the proposed project against the original land use plan from 2001 based on the impacts that were disclosed at that time. The city can also look at the benefit of the project during the decision making process.

The data used to determine the project’s traffic impact was based on traffic counts collected in May 2023, after the construction of Foothill Parkway, so the data in the 2024 EI R does include Foothill Parkway.

Let me know if you have any further questions.

Sincerely,
Sandra Vanian,
Planning Manager
From: Paul Ramlo <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2024 4:23 PM
To: Sandra Vanian <[email protected]>
Cc: Joanne Coletta <[email protected]>; Jim Steiner <[email protected]> Subject: Re: FW: Green River horse property development [CAUTION] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Sandra, thank you for your detailed response and explanation. It definitely helps me understand that verbiage in the EIR and gives me an idea of how significant of a change they are expecting. If I follow your explanation, it seems that the developer may have fallen short of the city’s requirements in a couple different areas. In your experience, would that stop the project completely or simply take the developer back to the drawing board?
Additionally, if I understand correctly, data was collected or utilized from the 2001 EIR which, I believe, was quite a bit before Foothill Parkway was connected to Green River Rd substantially impacting the traffic levels in the area. Was that factor considered or accounted for in the 2024 EIR?
I doing my best to remain neutral towards the development and only want to echo the feelings and questions of the Montenero community. My position on the board is obviously one that requires me to act in the best interests of the neighborhood as a whole.

Paul Ramlo
On Thu, Oct 31, 2024 at 12:50 PM Sandra Vanian <[email protected]> wrote:

Mr. Ramlo,
Thank you for your response to the city’s Notice Of Availability regarding the draft Green River Ranch Specific Plan Subsequent EIR (EIR). My name is Sandra Vanian and I am the Planning Manager for the Planning and Development Department. I am also the planner overseeing the project.

In response to your question of what a “significant” impact really means, it is a term that is used in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) when it comes to assessing a development’s impact on the environment when compared to thresholds established by a regulatory agency on certain areas of the environment.

Environmental reports prepared under CEQA cover multiple areas of discussion, such as biological resources, air quality, transportation, geological, etc. Each of these categories is regulated by a different agency and each agency establishes an operating threshold. Technical studies associated with the project are prepared to determine if a project would operate within those thresholds or exceed it. If a project exceeds an adopted threshold, even when a project implements mitigation measures to try and meet the threshold, CEQA considers this to a be significant impact instead of a less than significant impact. Basically, all projects have a change to the environment, it is just a matter of the project operating within established thresholds or in some cases above the threshold.

With respect to air quality, there are pollutant emissions emitted daily in our lives and these daily emission thresholds are established by the South Coast Air Quality Management District. Emissions come from mobile activities, such as passenger vehicles, trucks, and construction activity, and stationary operations such as landscape maintenance, the use of electricity in daily operations, the use of certain chemicals in a business (manufacturing process) or home (cleaning products, pesticides, etc.), exterior building coatings, and the like.

The air quality analysis prepared for the revised Green River Ranch project indicated the project would exceed certain pollutant emissions associated with the project’s operations. In the original EIR prepared for the Green River Ranch Specific Plan in 2001, pollutant emissions associated with future project operations already disclosed that the thresholds for stationary source emissions and mobile source emissions would be exceeded. The subsequent EIR prepared for the revised Green River Ranch project continues to show that pollutants associated with stationary and mobile source emissions would be exceeded even with mitigation. Therefore, the city needs to identify this as a significant impact.

Unlike the 2001 EIR, the 2024 subsequent EIR includes a health risk assessment regarding the exposure to toxic air contaminants, which includes exposure to diesel particulate matter as a result of heavy-duty diesel trucks accessing the site on nearby sensitive receptors. The assessment specifically looked at the nearest home (4341 San Viscaya Circle) to the project site. The revised project’s potential cancer risk is estimated to be 5.14 in one million. This is less than SCAQMD’s cancer risk threshold which is 10 in one million. As such, the revised project will not cause a significant human health or cancer risk to the nearby residential community.

As for the transportation impacts, CEQA revised this evaluation sometime in 2018 and requires the city to evaluate vehicle miles traveled instead of level of service impacts like in the 2001 EIR. Metric vehicle miles traveled (VMT) measures the number of “miles” traveled by vehicles associated with the project. The daily VMT that is expected to be generated by this project is 62.0, which exceeds the city’s daily VMT threshold of 40.6. The VMT is about getting more individuals to travel less miles in passenger vehicles. The EIR proposes mitigation measures (ride share programs, carpooling, etc.) to help reduce the project’s daily VMT, but there is no amount of feasible mitigation that can fully reduce the project’s VMT down to the city’s threshold. Therefore, this is considered a significant and unavoidable impact.

However, the number of daily vehicular trips generated by the revised project Some people who received this message don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important
[CAUTION] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Good afternoon Joanne. My name is Paul Ramlo and I am the HOA board president for the Montenero community in Corona. Our neighborhood is located in the hills abutting the Green River Road Horse Ranch Development. I wanted to reach out to you regarding a recent notice that was sent out to the neighborhood concerning the EIR for this project. Jim and I briefly spoke last week regarding the project and he recommended I reach out to you for clarification on some concerns.

As the board president, I am the recipient of many neighbors complaints and concerns regarding issues in our community. That of course includes their concerns over the horse ranch project. At Jim‘s recommendation, I wanted to reach out to you and seek clarification so that I can Address homeowner concerns with a little more certainty.

The neighborhood recently received the notification of the EIR meeting and of the published document online. Many of the homeowners have a great concern over the verbiage in the letter, which stated “implementation of the proposed project would result in significant and unavoidable impacts to air quality and transportation.” This verbiage alone can be very alarming to people and has obviously caused great concern in the neighborhood. I recognize that certain words are traditionally used in these types of reports and since I am not an EIR expert, I figured I would reach out to someone who might be able to clarify or at least expand on what a “significant” impact would really look like.

As I’m sure you are aware of, our neighborhood, especially cherished and benefited from the beautiful horse property that we have had had at the base of our neighborhood for so many years. Many of us are very concerned over the impact this development will have not only on air quality and traffic congestion, but more importantly, our home values. Any information you can share with me on the process of approving this type of project would be greatly appreciated. As you might assume, there are many neighbors that simply would like the property to remain undeveloped. I know that may be a very unrealistic expectation.

Thank you in advance for your time.

Paul Ramlo
Montenero neighborhood HOA President
compared to the original specific plan decreased by 61% (2001 project showed 11,207 daily trips and the revised project shows 4,370 daily trips). It is easier to understand vehicular trips than vehicle miles traveled because trips can be counted, which people can relate to.

You are correct that an EIR is not always easy to understand, hopefully the information in this email is easier to understand and helpful. In 2001 the project was entitled for future development so development is imminent.

If you have additional questions, please email me or call me at (951) 279-3553.

Sincerely,
Sandra Vanian
Planning Manager
P: (951) 279-3553
400 South Vicentia
Avenue
Corona, CA 92882
www.coronaca.gov
From: Paul Ramlo <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2024 3:27 PM
To: Joanne Coletta <[email protected]>
Cc: Jim Steiner <[email protected]>
Subject: Green River horse property development
10211 Sunland Blvd., Shadow Hills, CA 91040 (818) 650-0030 X101 [email protected] November 14, 2024
Sandra Vanian
Planning Manager
City of Corona – Planning & Development Department
400 S. Vicentia Ave., Ste. 120
Corona, CA 92882
Via U.S. Mail and email to [email protected]
Re: Comments on the Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report for the Green River Ranch Specific Plan Amendment and Industrial Business Park Project, SCH No. 2022080640
Dear Ms. Vanian:

Advocates for the Environment submits the comments in this letter regarding the Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Green River Ranch Specific Plan Amendment and Industrial Business Park Project (Project). The Project Site is located near the cross streets of Dominguez Ranch Road and Green River Road in the City of Corona (City), in Riverside County. The Project would involve developing 5.5 acres of “General Commercial” uses, 49.52 acres of “Business Park Industrial” (BPI), up to 32 “Estate Residential” lots on 20.39 acres, 83.55 acres of “Open Space General” land uses, and 1.44 acres of roads, all on the 160.4-acre Project Site. We have reviewed the EIR released in October 2024 and submit comments regarding the sufficiency of the EIR’s Greenhouse-Gas (GHG) analysis under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

The City Should Require the Project to be Net-Zero
Given the current regulatory context and technological advancements, a net-zero significance threshold is feasible and extensively supportable. GHG emissions from buildings, including indirect emissions from offsite generation of electricity, direct emissions produced onsite, and from construction with cement and steel, amounted to 21% of global GHG emissions in 2019. (IPCC Sixth Assessment Report, Climate Change 2022, WGIII, Mitigation of Climate Change, p. 9-4.) This is a considerable portion of global GHG emissions.

It is much more affordable to construct new building projects to be net-zero than to obtain the same level of GHG reductions by expensively retrofitting older buildings to comply with climate change regulations. Climate damages will keep increasing until we reach net zero GHG emissions, and there is a California state policy requiring the state to be net-zero by 2045. It therefore is economically unsound to construct new buildings that are not net-zero.

Environmental groups have achieved tremendous outcomes by litigation under CEQA. Two of the largest mixed-use development projects in the history of California, Newhall Ranch (now Advocates for the Environment
A non-profit public-interest law firm
and environmental advocacy organization
CEQA Comments to the City of Corona Page 2
Green River Ranch Specific Plan Amendment and Industrial Business Park Project November 14, 2024 10211 Sunland Blvd., Shadow Hills, CA 91040 (818) 650-0030 X101 [email protected] FivePoint Valencia), and Centennial (part of Tejon Ranch) decided to move forward as net-zero communities after losing CEQA lawsuits to environmental groups. The ability for these large projects to become net-zero indicates that it is achievable, even for large-scale developments. The Applicant for this Project should do the same.

We urge the City to adopt net-zero as the GHG significance threshold for this project. This threshold is well-supported by plans for the reduction of GHG emissions in California, and particularly the CARB Climate Change Scoping Plans. The CARB 2017 Scoping Plan states that “achieving no net additional increase in GHG emissions, resulting in no contribution to GHG impacts, is an appropriate overall objective for new development.” (CARB 2017 Scoping Plan, p. 101.) Additionally, the CARB 2022 Scoping Plan reaffirms the necessity of a net zero target by expressing:
“it is clear that California must transition away from fossil fuels to zero-emission technologies with all possible speed … in order to meet our GHG and air quality targets.” (CARB 2022 Scoping Plan, p. 184.) CARB further encourages a net-zero threshold in its strategies for local actions in Appendix D to the 2022 Scoping Plan. (CARB 2022 Scoping Plan, Appendix D p. 24-26.) Moving this Project forward as a net-zero project would not only be the right thing for the City to do, but also would help protect the City and the Applicant from CEQA GHG litigation.

CEQA GHG Significance Analysis
The EIR derived its GHG significance thresholds from the CEQA Appendix G Guidelines:
whether the Project would generate GHG emissions that may have a significant impact, and whether the Project would conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation for the reduction of GHG emissions. (EIR, p. 4.8-17.) The City used CalEEMod to quantify the net Project’s annual emissions, which were reported to be 19,208.02 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e) per year. (EIR, p. 4.8-19.) The EIR concluded that the Project’s GHG emissions would be less than significant after mitigation. (EIR, p. 4.8-20.)
Consistency with Identified Applicable Plans
The EIR includes a discussion of the City of Corona Climate Action Plan (CAP) and the 2022 Scoping Plan as evidence that the Project would not conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation for GHG emissions reductions. This significance analysis violates CEQA by failing to provide the necessary information to analyze the Project's consistency with the CAP, overlooking the Project’s conflict with the 2022 Scoping Plan, and failing to acknowledge and analyze all applicable plans for the reduction of GHGs. This Project is inconsistent with several applicable plans that were excluded. As a result, this significance analysis violates CEQA by being deficient and misleading in several areas.

CEQA Comments to the City of Corona Page 3
Green River Ranch Specific Plan Amendment and Industrial Business Park Project November 14, 2024 10211 Sunland Blvd., Shadow Hills, CA 91040 (818) 650-0030 X101 [email protected] Failure to provide information needed to analyze consistency with the CAP CEQA requires that EIRs include enough information to fully inform decision-makers and the public. Here, the EIR fails to include critical information necessary for assessing the project's consistency with the CAP. Specifically, the EIR does not detail the GHG reduction measures that the Project, will implement to meet the mandated 100-point requirement in the CAP or how the points will be apportioned. This omission hinders a comprehensive evaluation of the project’s environmental impacts and violates CEQA, which requires full disclosure of relevant information to inform decisionmakers and the public. Without this information, it remains unclear whether the Project aligns with the GHG reduction goals set forth by the CAP.

The Project chooses to demonstrate consistency through the CAP's point system rather than adhering to an established numerical threshold of significance for GHG emissions. As a result of this chosen threshold, the project proposes MM GHG 1. According to this measure, prior to issuing a building permit, the applicant shall provide documentation demonstrating that the improvements and/or buildings include the measures from the CAP screening tables (Appendix C to the CAP), as needed to achieve a minimum of 100 points for both the residential and non-residential portions.

Alternatively, specific measures may be substituted for other measures that achieve an equivalent amount of GHG reductions, subject to review. (DEIR, p. 4.8-21.) While the EIR claims that incorporation of this mitigation measure will result in less than significant emissions, it does not provide sufficient information to analyze the extent of GHG emissions reductions that the 100 points would achieve.

Neither the EIR nor the Appendix provide a copy of the CAP screening tables or specify which measures the project will commit to in order to reach the required 100-point minimum; instead, the EIR defers the selection of these measures to a future date. Mixed-use projects, such as this one, must complete both Table 1 and Table 2 of the CAP (CAP Appendix C, p. 6). However, both tables are missing from the EIR. As it currently stands, the language of MM GHG 1 defers the selection of the measures needed to achieve the 100 points for both the residential and non-residential portions of the project. The EIR withholds critical information from the general public by deferring these details to the future, leaving the public without a clear understanding of how GHG reductions will be achieved.

Furthermore, the requirement to identify specific measures for achieving the 100 points is especially pertinent because the CAP mandates that mixed-use projects when filling out table 1 and 2 are required to proportion the points identical to the proportioning of the mix of uses. (CAP Appendix C, p. 6). The EIR fails to provide this crucial information. To ensure consistency with the CAP, the selected measures must be detailed to confirm they are appropriately proportioned to reflect the project’s mixed-use nature. Without this information, the project may allocate points arbitrarily between the two tables, potentially resulting in inadequate GHG emission reductions.

This lack of information not only undermines transparency but also makes it difficult to ascertain whether the selected measures would effectively contribute to GHG emissions reductions.

CEQA Comments to the City of Corona Page 4
Green River Ranch Specific Plan Amendment and Industrial Business Park Project November 14, 2024 10211 Sunland Blvd., Shadow Hills, CA 91040 (818) 650-0030 X101 [email protected] By failing to provide the necessary details, the EIR violates CEQA’s mandates for full disclosure, thereby jeopardizing the integrity of the efforts aimed at achieving meaningful GHG reduction goals.

Inadequate Commitment to the CAP
The inclusion of an alternative provision in MM GHG-1 undermines the project’s commitment to the CAP's GHG reduction goals. While the measure requires the project applicant to demonstrate compliance with the CAP GHG Emissions Screening Tables to achieve a minimum of 100 points, it also allows for the substitution of specific measures with alternatives that purportedly achieve equivalent GHG reductions. (DEIR, p. 4-8-21.) This flexibility introduces uncertainty and potential inconsistency in how GHG reductions are realized. The flexibility undermines the integrity of the consistency analysis because it is unclear which CAP measures would have been chosen for the Project and it is difficult to calculate the associated GHG reductions with the measures in the screening tables. MM GHG-1 is therefore vague and unenforceable, in violation of CEQA.

The Project Would be Inconsistent with the 2022 Scoping Plan The DEIR asserted that the Project would not conflict with the 2022 Scoping Plan. Yet, there are some policies in the 2022 Scoping Plan that the Project would not adhere to. The 2022 Scoping Plan sets a goal for 50% of all industrial energy demand to be electrified by 2045 (2022 CARB Scoping Plan, p. 77).1 The EIR makes no showing that the Project is consistent with this goal. The 2022 CARB Scoping Plan also places particular emphasis on decarbonizing industrial facilities by “displacing fossil fuel use with a mix of electrification, solar thermal heat, biomethane, low- or zerocarbon hydrogen, and other low-carbon fuels to provide energy for heat and reduce combustion emissions” (2022 CARB Scoping Plan, p. 208). Again, the Project does not appear to be consistent with this goal, based on the analysis provided in the EIR. The Project creates a conflict with the 2022 Scoping Plan by its heavy reliance on diesel fuel in its operations. (See EIR, p. 4.6-19 [noting an estimate of over a million gallons of combined diesel and gasoline consumed annually for operations.]) Accordingly, the Project would have a significant GHG impact under the City’s chosen significance threshold.

The EIR Should Have Analyzed All Applicable Plans
The City chose, as its second GHG threshold, whether the Project would “conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs.” (EIR, p. 4.8-18.) This language requires that the EIR analyze the Project’s consistency with all other applicable plans, not just the plans that the City prefers to analyze.

An agency must consider a project’s GHG impact over time to reasonably evaluate the full extent of environmental impact as CEQA requires. The EIR did not account for the Project’s lifespan, 1 2022 Scoping Plan located at: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2023-04/2022-sp.pdf CEQA Comments to the City of Corona Page 5
Green River Ranch Specific Plan Amendment and Industrial Business Park Project November 14, 2024 10211 Sunland Blvd., Shadow Hills, CA 91040 (818) 650-0030 X101 [email protected] which is presumed to be 30 years due to the construction impact being amortized over a 30-year period. (EIR, p. 4.8-19.) Therefore, the Project must show consistency with long-term State GHG goals, including Executive Order B-55-18 (EO B- 55-18), and the 2017 CARB Scoping Plan.

EO B-55-18 requires the State of California to achieve carbon neutrality—net zero GHG emissions—by 2045. The Project is inconsistent with EO B-55-18 because it does not prohibit the use of gasoline, diesel, and natural gas. In fact, the Project would use diesel-powered equipment during construction, and require five emergency diesel-powered fire pumps during operations. (EIR, p. 4.6- 18; Appendix I p, 54.) Burning non-renewable fuels, such as diesel, results in substantial GHG emissions, preventing the Project from ever achieving carbon neutrality, unless it enters into agreements with the applicant and/or future tenant to ensure that fossil fuel use is on track to be eliminated by 2045. Thus, the Project would conflict with EO B-55-18. As stated by the City’s chosen threshold, conflict with any applicable policy would be a significant GHG impact.

The 2017 Scoping Plan was developed to help California comply with SB 32, which mandates a 40% reduction in GHG emissions below 1990 levels by 2030 (Health & Safety Code § 38566). The EIR does not explain how the Project aligns with these objectives or the 2050 goal of reducing emissions by 80% below 1990 levels. Moreover, the 2017 Scoping Plan sets statewide per capita GHG emissions targets of 6 MTCO2e by 2030 and 2 MTCO2e by 2050 (CARB Scoping Plan, p. 99).

With the Project’s per-service population GHG emissions of around 17 MTCO2e/capita, the Project significantly overshoots the 2050 target.2 Further, there is no evidence that the Project would implement measures to reach the target by 2050. Given that this reduction must be achieved within the Project’s operational lifespan, it is evident that the Project will remain inconsistent with the 2017 Scoping Plan's long-term goals. Therefore, the Project’s GHG impact is significant under the second threshold because it directly conflicts with established plans for reducing GHG emissions.

Consequently, because the Project is inconsistent with applicable plans for the reduction of GHGs, it is significant under the second threshold.

MM GHG-1 is Improperly Deferred
A lead agency must describe and analyze proposed mitigation measures in the EIR and cannot defer to a later time the discussion of mitigation measures—including the potential impact of any mitigation measures taken. Here, MM GHG-1, which defers the decision on particular measures from the Screening Tables to implement until just prior to the issuance of a building permit. (EIR, p.

4.8-21.) This is improper deferral because the City is required to identify the specific, enforceable measures during the preparation of the EIR, and MM GHG-1 does not enforce achieving 100 points on the Screening Tables because it allows for an alternative in which specific measures may be “substituted for other measures,” without identifying any standards for determining appropriate 2 19,208.02 𝑀𝑇𝐶𝑂2𝑒 ÷ 1,125 𝑒𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑜𝑦𝑒𝑒𝑠 = 17.07 𝑀𝑇𝐶𝑂2𝑒/𝑠𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑖𝑐𝑒 𝑝𝑜𝑝𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 CEQA Comments to the City of Corona Page 6
Green River Ranch Specific Plan Amendment and Industrial Business Park Project November 14, 2024 10211 Sunland Blvd., Shadow Hills, CA 91040 (818) 650-0030 X101 [email protected] substitutions. Thus, the discussion of MM GHG-1 did not demonstrate that it could reduce the Project’s GHG impact to a less than significant level, let alone the fair share which is required for cumulative GHG impact.

Conclusion
In conclusion, the Project would have a significant GHG impact under the chosen threshold of consistency with applicable plans because the Project is not consistent with applicable plans, policies, and regulations for the reduction of GHGs. The Project’s impacts are therefore significant, under the threshold adopted by the City. MM GHG-1 is an inadequate mitigation measure to reduce the Project’s GHG impact because it is unenforceable and improperly deferred.

Please put Advocates for the Environment on the list of interested parties to receive updates about the progress of this potential project approval. We make this request under Public Resources Code, section 21092.2.

Sincerely,
Dean Wallraff, Attorney at Law
Executive Director, Advocates for the Environment
JASON E. UHLEY 1995 MARKET STREET
General Manager-Chief Engineer RIVERSIDE, CA 92501
951.955.1200
951.788.9965 FAX
www.rcflood.org

RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL

AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
259388
October 21, 2024
City of Corona
Planning Department
Post Office Box 940
Corona, CA 92882-0940
Attention: Sandra Vanian Re: Green River Ranch Specific Plan Amendment & Business Park Industrial
Development Project, APNs 101-180-014,
101-180-015, 101-180-017, 101-180-034,
101-180-035, 101-180-037, 101-180-038 and
101-190-034
The Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (District) does not usually review land divisions/land use cases or provide State Division of Real Estate letters/flood hazard reports for projects that are located within incorporated cities. Exceptions are made for cases with items of specific interest to the District including District Master Drainage Plan facilities, other regional flood control and drainage facilities which could be considered a logical component or extension of a master plan system, and District Area Drainage Plan fees (development mitigation fees).

The District's review is based on the above-referenced project transmittal, received October 4, 2024. The District has not reviewed the proposed project in detail, and the following comments do not in any way constitute or imply District approval or endorsement of the proposed project with respect to flood hazard, public health and safety, or any other such issue:
☒ This project would not be impacted by District Master Drainage Plan facilities, nor are other facilities of regional interest proposed.
☐ This project involves District proposed Master Drainage Plan facilities, namely, . The District will accept ownership of such facilities on written request by the City. The Project Applicant shall enter into a cooperative agreement establishing the terms and conditions of inspection, operation, and maintenance with the District and any other maintenance partners. Facilities must be constructed to District standards, and District plan check and inspection will be required for District acceptance.

Plan check, inspection, and administrative fees will be required. All regulatory permits (and all documents pertaining thereto, e.g., Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plans, Conservation Plans/Easements) that are to be secured by the Applicant for both facility construction and maintenance shall be submitted to the District for review. The regulatory permits' terms and conditions shall be approved by the District prior to improvement plan approval, map recordation, or finalization of the regulatory permits. There shall be no unreasonable constraint upon the District's ability to operate and maintain the flood control facility(ies) to protect public health and safety. ☐ This project proposes channels, storm drains larger than 36 inches in diameter, or other facilities that could be considered regional in nature and/or a logical extension a District's facility, the District would consider accepting ownership of such facilities on written request by the City. The Project Applicant shall enter into a cooperative agreement establishing the terms and conditions of inspection, operation, City of Corona - 2 - October 21, 2024
Re: Green River Ranch Specific Plan
Amendment & Business Park Industrial 259388
Development Project, APNs 101-180-014,
101-180-015, 101-180-017, 101-180-034,
101-180-035, 101-180-037, 101-180-038 and
101-190-034
EM:mm
and maintenance with the District and any other maintenance partners. Facilities must be constructed to District standards, and District plan check and inspection will be required for District acceptance.

Plan check, inspection, and administrative fees will be required. The regulatory permits' terms and conditions shall be approved by the District prior to improvement plan approval, map recordation, or finalization of the regulatory permits. There shall be no unreasonable constraint upon the District's ability to operate and maintain the flood control facility(ies) to protect public health and safety. ☐ An encroachment permit shall be obtained for any construction related activities occurring within District right of way or facilities, namely, ____________________. If a proposed storm drain connection exceeds the hydraulic performance of the existing drainage facilities, mitigation will be required. For further information, contact the District's Encroachment Permit Section at 951.955.1266. ☐ The District's previous comments are still valid.

GENERAL INFORMATION
The project proponent shall bear the responsibility for complying with all applicable mitigation measures defined in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) document, and/or Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and with all other federal, state, and local environmental rules and regulations that may apply, such as, but not limited to, the Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP), Sections 404 and 401 of the Clean Water Act, California Fish and Game Code Section 1602, and the Porter Cologne Water Quality Control Act.

The District's action associated with the subject project triggers evaluation by the District with respect to the applicant's compliance with federal, state, and local environmental laws. For this project, the Lead Agency is the agency in the address above, and the District is a Responsible Agency under CEQA. The District, as a Copermittee under the MSHCP, needs to demonstrate that all District related activities, including the actions identified above, are consistent with the MSHCP. This is typically achieved through determinations from the CEQA Lead Agency (if they are also a Co-permittee) for the project. For the MSHCP, the District's focus will be particular to Sections 6.1.2, 6.1.3, 6.1.4, 6.3.2, 7.3.7, 7.5.3, and Appendix C of the MSHCP. Please include consistency determination statements from the Lead Agency/Co-permittee for the project for each of these sections in the CEQA document. The District may also require that an applicant provide supporting technical documentation for environmental clearance.

This project may require a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. Clearance for grading, recordation, or other final approval should not be given until the City has determined that the project has been granted a permit or is shown to be exempt.

If this project involves a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) mapped floodplain, then the City should require the applicant to provide all studies, calculations, plans, and other information required to meet FEMA requirements, and should further require that the applicant obtain a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) prior to grading, recordation, or other final approval of the project and a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) prior to occupancy.

Very truly yours,

AMY MCNEILL
Engineering Project Manager
JASON E. UHLEY 1995 MARKET STREET
General Manager-Chief Engineer RIVERSIDE, CA 92501
951.955.1200
951.788.9965 FAX
www.rcflood.org
259577

RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL

AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
November 7, 2024
City of Corona
Planning Department
Post Office Box 940
Corona, CA 92882-0940
Attention: Sandra Vanian Re: TTM 37963, GPA 2020-0002,
SPA 2020-0006, PP 2020-0004,
APNs 101-180-014, 101-180-015,
101-180-017, 101-180-035, 101-180-037
and 101-180-038
The Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (District) does not usually review land divisions/land use cases or provide State Division of Real Estate letters/flood hazard reports for projects that are located within incorporated cities. Exceptions are made for cases with items of specific interest to the District including District Master Drainage Plan facilities, other regional flood control and drainage facilities which could be considered a logical component or extension of a master plan system, and District Area Drainage Plan fees (development mitigation fees).

The District's review is based on the above-referenced project transmittal, received October 31, 2024. The District has not reviewed the proposed project in detail, and the following comments do not in any way constitute or imply District approval or endorsement of the proposed project with respect to flood hazard, public health and safety, or any other such issue:
☒ This project would not be impacted by District Master Drainage Plan facilities, nor are other facilities of regional interest proposed.
☐ This project involves District proposed Master Drainage Plan facilities, namely, . The District will accept ownership of such facilities on written request by the City. The Project Applicant shall enter into a cooperative agreement establishing the terms and conditions of inspection, operation, and maintenance with the District and any other maintenance partners. Facilities must be constructed to District standards, and District plan check and inspection will be required for District acceptance. Plan check, inspection, and administrative fees will be required. All regulatory permits (and all documents pertaining thereto, e.g., Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plans, Conservation Plans/Easements) that are to be secured by the Applicant for both facility construction and maintenance shall be submitted to the District for review. The regulatory permits' terms and conditions shall be approved by the District prior to improvement plan approval, map recordation, or finalization of the regulatory permits. There shall be no unreasonable constraint upon the District's ability to operate and maintain the flood control facility(ies) to protect public health and safety.
☐ This project proposes channels, storm drains larger than 36 inches in diameter, or other facilities that could be considered regional in nature and/or a logical extension a District's facility, the District would consider accepting ownership of such facilities on written request by the City. The Project Applicant shall enter into a cooperative agreement establishing the terms and conditions of inspection, operation, and maintenance with the District and any other maintenance partners. Facilities must be constructed to District standards, and District plan check and inspection will be required for District acceptance.

City of Corona - 2 - November 7, 2024
Re: TTM 37963, GPA 2020-0002, 259577
SPA 2020-0006, PP 2020-0004,
APNs 101-180-014, 101-180-015,
101-180-017, 101-180-035, 101-180-037
and 101-180-038
Plan check, inspection, and administrative fees will be required. The regulatory permits' terms and conditions shall be approved by the District prior to improvement plan approval, map recordation, or finalization of the regulatory permits. There shall be no unreasonable constraint upon the District's ability to operate and maintain the flood control facility(ies) to protect public health and safety. ☐ An encroachment permit shall be obtained for any construction related activities occurring within District right of way or facilities, namely, _______. If a proposed storm drain connection exceeds the hydraulic performance of the existing drainage facilities, mitigation will be required. For further information, contact the District's Encroachment Permit Section at 951.955.1266. ☒ The District's previous comments dated October 21, 2024 for this Green River Ranch Specific Plan Amendment and Business Park Industrial Development Project are still valid.

GENERAL INFORMATION
The project proponent shall bear the responsibility for complying with all applicable mitigation measures defined in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) document, and/or Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and with all other federal, state, and local environmental rules and regulations that may apply, such as, but not limited to, the Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP), Sections 404 and 401 of the Clean Water Act, California Fish and Game Code Section 1602, and the Porter Cologne Water Quality Control Act.

The District's action associated with the subject project triggers evaluation by the District with respect to the applicant's compliance with federal, state, and local environmental laws. For this project, the Lead Agency is the agency in the address above, and the District is a Responsible Agency under CEQA. The District, as a Copermittee under the MSHCP, needs to demonstrate that all District related activities, including the actions identified above, are consistent with the MSHCP. This is typically achieved through determinations from the CEQA Lead Agency (if they are also a Co-permittee) for the project. For the MSHCP, the District's focus will be particular to Sections 6.1.2, 6.1.3, 6.1.4, 6.3.2, 7.3.7, 7.5.3, and Appendix C of the MSHCP. Please include consistency determination statements from the Lead Agency/Co-permittee for the project for each of these sections in the CEQA document. The District may also require that an applicant provide supporting technical documentation for environmental clearance.

This project may require a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. Clearance for grading, recordation, or other final approval should not be given until the City has determined that the project has been granted a permit or is shown to be exempt.

If this project involves a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) mapped floodplain, then the City should require the applicant to provide all studies, calculations, plans, and other information required to meet FEMA requirements, and should further require that the applicant obtain a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) prior to grading, recordation, or other final approval of the project and a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) prior to occupancy.

Very truly yours,

AMY MCNEILL
Engineering Project Manager
EM:zl
Attachment

From: Mauricio Alvarez
To: Sandra Vanian
Subject: GPA2020-0002, SPA2020-0006, TTM 37963, PP2020-0004 Date: Tuesday, November 12, 2024 9:50:59 AM
[CAUTION] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Good Morning Sandra,
Thank you for including RTA in the notice of the public hearing for the proposed warehouse project on Green River Rd & Dominguez Ranch Road. After further review, there are no comments to submit for this particular project.

Thank you,
Mauricio Alvarez, MBA
Planning Analyst
Riverside Transit Agency
p: 951.565.5260 | e: [email protected]
Website | Facebook | Twitter | Instagram
1825 Third Street, Riverside, CA 92507
From: A Jasman
To: Sandra Vanian
Subject: Green River Ranch Specific Plan
Date: Wednesday, November 20, 2024 5:30:34 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important [CAUTION] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

I am against any changes to the plans outside of increases to designated open space.

I am against any plans that create noise, that bring truck traffic, create light from signage or lampposts or ambient light from structures.

I am against any plans increasing car traffic either from large employee staffs, delivery trucks, or other traffic.

I am against any structures/businesses that create pollution, steam evaporation, or other visual or non-visual exhaust.

Amy Jasman
23 year Sierra Del Oro resident
2515 Glenbush Cir
Corona, CA 92882
Yahoo Mail: Search, Organize, Conquer
From: ileana alvarez
To: Sandra Vanian
Subject: Green River Ranch Plan
Date: Wednesday, November 20, 2024 5:59:04 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important [CAUTION] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Hello Sandra,
My name is Ileana Alvarez, I'm a residen of corona in sierra del oro and I am writting this email to inform you that I'm agains any ammendments to the Green River Ranch Specific plan that increase traffic, noise pollution, light pollution, create carbon emission, increase exhaust or emissions from buildings, etc.

Feel free to reach out to me if you have any qustions
Ileana Alvarez
714-507-9756
752 Meridian Cir.

Corona, Ca
From: Kim Ishiki
To: Sandra Vanian
Subject: Project on green river.

Date: Wednesday, November 20, 2024 5:59:53 PM
[You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
[CAUTION] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

To whom it may concern,
I oppose to the development on green river. The traffic and congestion, the pollution and emissions are not in the best interest of this neighborhood.

Thank you
Sent from my iPhone
From: Francesca & Pietro
To: Sandra Vanian
Subject: Fwd: Public Comment - Green River Ranch Specific Plan Amendment & Business Park Industrial Development Date: Wednesday, November 20, 2024 6:20:33 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important [CAUTION] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Hello Sandra,
If you could change the last sentence of my public comment below to " I ask that the zoning changes Not Be Approved and Greatly Negatively Impact the Community of SDO and Corona, Thank You." from "The zoning changed should not be approved and greatly negatively impact the SDO and Coorona." Autocorrect changed my last sentence to improper grammar as I was rushing to make sure my public comment was sent by today to be included in the staff report for the Commission Meeting on 11/25, and just found out about the meeting and having to send it to be included in the report to staff by today, the Wed. before the meeting.

Thank you for your help and time.

Best Regards,
Francesca Da Sacco
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Francesca & Pietro <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 6:00 PM
Subject: Public Comment - Green River Ranch Specific Plan Amendment & Business Park Industrial Development
To: <[email protected]>
Hello Sandra Vanian,
I am sending the following public comments to be included to the staff and planning commission for the Public meeting on 11/25
As a resident of Sierra Del Oro I have serious concerns about this project being approved and the rezoning requests being prospectively approved by staff, City Council, and Corona's planning commission. In 2022 My Husband & I attended the Developer Scoping Meeting where a presentation from the Developer was given. It contained the proposals approved in 2001 & what the developer wanted/wants now, to change zoning to make it an industrial park which includes 5 large Industrial Warehouses with 746,167 Sq, Ft. & a bunch of semi loading and unloading docks & 1,200 parking spaces as part of the rezoning.

Resident after resident voiced many concerns about/against the zoning changes & negative effects it would have on the environment, wildlife, community of SDO, traffic issues, safety issues, infrastructure issues & many other negative impacts to residents of Corona. Some of the main concerns were the amount of increased traffic this will inevitably bring to our community which already struggles w/ serious traffic issues. We already have a serious risk of being locked in our communities whenever there is a traffic accident on the freeway, or heaven forbid if a serious emergency hit! I have personally had to cancel Drs. appts and other appt. in the past because of being locked in my community because of traffic issues, construction, or accidents. This proposal is alarming considering the traffic ramifications alone, and the fact that our infrastructure annot handle this.

There were also many concerns regarding the environmental impact, wildlife, pollution, air quality, & a big concern I had which is how can a proper and accurate Environmental Impact Report be done when they don't know what corporations or companies will be using these large industrial warehouses, or what they will be used for? I asked this question directly to the project presenter at the scoping meeting in 2022 and he did not have an answer, and said "It just is"! When I look at pieces of the environmental report which I just received the links, and havent really had time to properly review. The report from a few links I clicked on looks unfinished with statements like "Our area does not handle this so we don't know, or an expert was contacted and they said they weren't aware of a certain issue but then provides multiple other people to contact that might have information or a different answer. Some of these reports are based on information that was done 25 years ago and are outdated, for example the earthquake fault report. There is a fault that runs directly under this project, and the last report was done 25 years ago in 1999.

It's also really disappointing that we signed up on multiple lists that were provided at the original original scoping meeting in 2022 and never received 1 update. I'm guessing we aren't the only ones that didn't get updates since the original meeting was jam packed. Multiple Corona Employees at the meeting said we would be updated if we signed up for the list. My husband and I signed up on multiple lists and did not receive any updates except for one from the developer yesterday 11/19/24 that included an updated PDF of their proposal with no mention of the Public Meeting on 11/25, or public comment, only that it's ready to go forward for approval. We also were never sent the public notice for the Public Hearing where residents can comment for 11/25 th meeting. I just found out today by accident when I signed up to be notified. I also made public comments previously in the last meeting, and did not see them in the public comments section on your website. The people at the meeting were told their comments would be made public and a part of the project. I was also told that in an email, but when I look on the website I dont see my comments or the comments of many people that spoke at the initial scoping meeting.

Sugar coating this development by promoting the trade off for allowing the zoning changes to large industrial warehouses and getting the top 80 acres of the property changed to open space instead of building estate houses on it, and still include some residential towards the top is not a fair trade off or any excuse to allow for this selling out of SDO, and the residents quality of life. Is the land at the top even feasible to be built on at this point considering the severe fire danger right there, possible landslides, an earthquake fault that resides right under it... Not to mention the dangerous grading conditions? I remember the day the construction worker died from grading Sierra Bella a sad day for our community that I will never forget, and the fact that a worker died building that development on grades that were "deemed safe", but proved deadly for the gentleman that lost his life grading for estate houses in the SDO foothills....

Also seems like a really unfair trade for 746,000+ sq feet in industrial warehouses with a bunch of semi loading docs... and the selling out of our community in SDO and Corona.

I am not opposed to development in Corona, but this is the absolute wrong place to change zoning to 746,000+ sq feet of industrial warehouse park. The current infrastructure cannot handle this type of industrial warehouse park, and the zoning changes negatively affect the quality of life of the residents of SDO, including huge safety risks for the residents of SDO.

This environmental impact report is not accurate since it is based on certain data over that is outdated and over 25 years old. And the companies /corporations that could be moving in have not even been identified which greatly impacts this report. The zoning changed should not be approved and greatly negatively impact the SDO and Coorona.

Best Regards,
Francesca Da Sacco
From: John Fox
To: Sandra Vanian
Subject: Western Realco proposal to be discussed at 11/25/24 Planning Commission meeting Date: Wednesday, November 20, 2024 2:42:31 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important [CAUTION] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Hi Sandra,
In case I’m unable to make the meeting, I’d like to submit comments and questions about the proposed project and zoning change for “the horse ranch” property by developer, Western Realco, scheduled to be reviewed by the Planning Commission on Monday, 11/25.

While I generally support the idea of what the developer proposes, I have several concerns:

The insistence on creating a mostly single-level building pad, necessitating massive earthmoving, creating a pad elevation about 40 feet higher than Green River Road at the northeast corner of the proposed development at the intersection of Green River and Dominguez Ranch Road.

What assurance will there be that this will not become a logistics center with diesel trucks coming and going day and night and sitting idling while on-site?The project needs to limit operations to prohibit overnight hours and ensure the property is secure during those hours.

The question of overnight operations and security during those hours is due to persistent street racing and congregation of such vehicles at the adjacent Promenade retail mall, of which Corona PD is well aware.

Light pollution from rooftop skylights lit day and night. A couple dozen homes in Montenero and everyone exiting the neighborhood will have a view of the project’s rooftops.

Conflicting claims within the EIR regarding traffic. While the stated intent of the developer is to create jobs in Corona, the EIR states that vehicle trip times associated with the project will be higher than the average for the area, meaning that most traffic to the site will be from outside Corona.

Although the developer says this project is “not intended” as a logistics center, the design lends itself to that purpose, leading to the chance that a large company could scoop up most or all of the space, using the up to 50 loading docks for trucking distribution. Prevailing winds and the topography of the area mean noise and emissions will naturally flow southeast into the Montenero residential tract. Note that equipment backing up and beeping is already an issue from the 91/71 interchange construction.

While it is natural for new development of any kind to add to traffic, this project will exist in the just about the worst choke point in the city. Every effort needs to be made to ensure that impact is mitigated. I doubt that a dedicated right-turn lane into the new project and an extension of the right turn-only lane onto the new eastbound 91 onramp will help much. That (fourth) lane onto eastbound 91 will need to be isolated from the #3 lane to be effective.

In spite of any future retail development in the parcel on the north side of Green River Road, this project will be the main gateway welcome into the western entrance to Corona. It can’t look like an industrial park. A mostly single-level pad with 750,000 square feet of industrial buildings on this rolling acreage including a chunk of the foothills is truly a case of trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. Pad slopes with plantings that will take decades to mature don’t adequately disguise the industrial nature of this project.

Respectfully submitted,
John Fox
1300 San Ponte Rd.

Corona, CA 92882
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important From: Belinda Capilla
To: Belinda Capilla
Subject: FW: Green River Ranch Development
Date: Thursday, November 21, 2024 7:34:19 AM
From: jennifer3115 <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2024 8:06 PM
To: Sandra Vanian <[email protected]>
Subject: Green River Ranch Development
[CAUTION] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Hi Sandra,
I live at 3725 Foxplain in SDO. I am deeply disappointed in the plan to build MORE industrial buildings. This development has zero positive effects for the local community and so many negative impacts. I understand the need for development but West Corona needs Shopping and Retail and Grocery not more industrial buildings. We are trapped in West Corona and only have one sub par Grocery store, zero quality restaurants and no shopping. The traffic is so bad we can't even get to south Corona, Anaheim Hills, or Chino Hills without strategically planning these trips around high traffic times. I don't understand why we can't have a restaurant and Retail area like other cities do. Eastvale has many of these types of sites. And is still developing. West Corona does not need more industrial, gas stations, starbucks, or Jack in the Box. We need a quality Retail and restaurants center where community can come together.

Please reconsider this industrial plan
Thank you
Jennifer and Michael Campbell
Original Homeowners 1987
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important From: Belinda Capilla
To: Belinda Capilla
Subject: FW: Green River Ranch
Date: Thursday, November 21, 2024 5:15:04 PM
Importance: High
From: Niko Todorov <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2024 4:47 PM
To: Sandra Vanian <[email protected]>
Subject: Green River Ranch
[CAUTION] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Dear Sandra,
As a 25 year SDO resident I am against any amendments to the Green River Ranch Specific Plan that increase traffic to an already congested neighborhood, which affects our safety.